How to handle pugs

[LetoII.3782]

> @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > > @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > > > If you didn't learn in the first 6 years why start now?

> > >

> > > Because those that learned 6 years ago are mostly gone.

> >

> > That's assuming the **vast swarms of clueless started last week**. I'd posit instead they've been here all along but had more people (aka organized guilds) to hide behind.

>

> We both know that assumption is wrong.

>

> The organized guilds leaving / not running nearly as often has hurt, and I can’t blame them for it.

>

> I guess my only point was, there is a vacuum. I think people will try to step into it, but without people to train them, (and this isn’t blaming anyone for that) it will go extremely roughly, because of the ‘vast swarms of clueless’.

>

>

 

I expressed my opinion on the matter roughly. My point was, people _have_ tried already. Every snowflake has a perfectly reasonable explanation for their behavior. However, having thrown aside the opportunity to pick up the torch (of organized team gameplay) from those before, the game now lacks the essential guilds standing up front. While people may say they want to improve on the forums, it takes a Cookie or Indo for a significant population to gather in proper builds. And as it takes a celebrity for most to even _try_, the commander pool grows smaller and smaller.

Myself, I'll shed no tears over the death of blobbing. But I'll not stand mute when the casual crowd that brought the game to this state seeks to give advice like textmanding and catering to snowflake whims.

 

Tl;Dr: there is no way to start commanding now as the population is largely unleadable. Attempting to do so is an exercise in frustration which will end up with you being scapegoat for the communal failure.

[Strider Pj.2193]

> @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > > > @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > > > > If you didn't learn in the first 6 years why start now?

> > > >

> > > > Because those that learned 6 years ago are mostly gone.

> > >

> > > That's assuming the **vast swarms of clueless started last week**. I'd posit instead they've been here all along but had more people (aka organized guilds) to hide behind.

> >

> > We both know that assumption is wrong.

> >

> > The organized guilds leaving / not running nearly as often has hurt, and I can’t blame them for it.

> >

> > I guess my only point was, there is a vacuum. I think people will try to step into it, but without people to train them, (and this isn’t blaming anyone for that) it will go extremely roughly, because of the ‘vast swarms of clueless’.

> >

> >

>

> I expressed my opinion on the matter roughly. My point was, people _have_ tried already. Every snowflake has a perfectly reasonable explanation for their behavior. However, having thrown aside the opportunity to pick up the torch (of organized team gameplay) from those before, the game now lacks the essential guilds standing up front. While people may say they want to improve on the forums, it takes a Cookie or Indo for a significant population to gather in proper builds. And as it takes a celebrity for most to even _try_, the commander pool grows smaller and smaller.

> Myself, I'll shed no tears over the death of blobbing. But I'll not stand mute when the casual crowd that brought the game to this state seeks to give advice like textmanding and catering to snowflake whims.

>

> Tl;Dr: there is no way to start commanding now as the population is largely unleadable. Attempting to do so is an exercise in frustration which will end up with you being scapegoat for the communal failure.

 

I’ll agree with your whole post. I thank you for clarifying.

 

[LetoII.3782]

Only for you bby

[Strider Pj.2193]

:blush:

 

You just want to kill me I know.

[Trajan.4953]

> @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > > > @"Strider Pj.2193" said:

> > > > > @"LetoII.3782" said:

> > > > > If you didn't learn in the first 6 years why start now?

> > > >

> > > > Because those that learned 6 years ago are mostly gone.

> > >

> > > That's assuming the **vast swarms of clueless started last week**. I'd posit instead they've been here all along but had more people (aka organized guilds) to hide behind.

> >

> > We both know that assumption is wrong.

> >

> > The organized guilds leaving / not running nearly as often has hurt, and I can’t blame them for it.

> >

> > I guess my only point was, there is a vacuum. I think people will try to step into it, but without people to train them, (and this isn’t blaming anyone for that) it will go extremely roughly, because of the ‘vast swarms of clueless’.

> >

> >

>

> I expressed my opinion on the matter roughly. My point was, people _have_ tried already. Every snowflake has a perfectly reasonable explanation for their behavior. However, having thrown aside the opportunity to pick up the torch (of organized team gameplay) from those before, the game now lacks the essential guilds standing up front. While people may say they want to improve on the forums, it takes a Cookie or Indo for a significant population to gather in proper builds. And as it takes a celebrity for most to even _try_, the commander pool grows smaller and smaller.

> Myself, I'll shed no tears over the death of blobbing. But I'll not stand mute when the casual crowd that brought the game to this state seeks to give advice like textmanding and catering to snowflake whims.

>

> Tl;Dr: there is no way to start commanding now as the population is largely unleadable. Attempting to do so is an exercise in frustration which will end up with you being scapegoat for the communal failure.

 

Very well put

[Optimator.3589]

Follow Dods a few times for pointers on how to handle pugs. :trollface:

 

In all seriousness, though, I agree with Leto. It's very difficult and time-consuming to build a server culture where even a decent segment of the population will get in coms and get on proper builds. And even with that culture, many of the lesser-known commanders on the server probably still lack the star power to draw casusals into squad and coms. Thus, they are running with a bad comp, and no/low coordination due to primarily textmanding, and then they get 1-pushed by an enemy group that knows what the hell it's doing. A pug or two leaves after each wipe, and eventually the commander just gives up.

[Zephyra.4709]

**LetoII.3782** Sums it all up.

 

You can try all you like (even simple words like stack/bomb/hold...) but nowadays not only is it hard to herd the cats the cats sometimes hiss back at you for telling them they should swap builds to something that helps the group as a whole. Nope... they want their milk on a silver platter with zero effort.

[Chaba.5410]

You don't lead pugs... Pugs lead you.

[Zajo.5946]

> @"enkidu.5937" said:

> > @"Zajo.5946" said:

> > What I don't understand is why one would join something that doesn't fit your playstyle?

> Because big-scale modes like WvW are about making tradeoffs, especially if its not a WvW guild, but a public lead / open tag with 50ish pug ppl in it. And because of a lack of options, as I already posted. I personally expect ppl, that only want to play a very specific style to get organized in guilds, but not to create open public tags and then wonder or rage, why ppl don't act as they are supposed to. So I guess, your question can be applied to both, commanders and followers as well.

>

> Since the TO only communicates via chat, I guess, its complicated to make clear, what he / she is preferring / demanding from his / her followers. Thats why I asked, what exactly he / she is expecting from a chat-led public zerg / open tag. I would expect ppl, that dislike strictly coordinated play, to join chat commanders, and ppl that enjoy strictly coordinated play, to join a voice chat commander.

 

Yes, I hear you and I am inclined to agree with you. But I still think it's backwards.

So the commander should think: 'No one will do what I say anyway in an open tag, might as well go closed or join an already closed orginized guild that suits my way'

And the player should think: 'I'll join this open tag and just not do what the commander asks me to do'

Is this what we should expect and just roll over and fully adapt too?

Even if I understand what you say, of how things are, and see it myself. I still think it can be different and I'll advocate for that. By i.e keep supporting open tags, who are decent and communicative with their squad and keep asking the players who joins open tags to take part in an active squad. Because I think we all will benefit from it.

And part f that is exactly what you suggested in the end there: to activly make choices of what type of commander to join, based on your preference. You want/like coordinated gaming -> go ts tag. You want/like selfcontrolling gameplay together with others -> go chat commander.

 

> > @"Zajo.5946" said:

> > Personally I avoid everything that differs from what I want and while I do that I choose not to join what I dislike and then talk badly about it (ok, that might not be true, I do complain and whine. But I avoid doing it in a way that ruins the game for others).

> There are commanders, that exactly do this: open a public tag and then complain about casuals. There are ppl that understand their server as a team and primarily are willing to do tradeoffs, for the sake of winning. And there are ppl (commanders and puglings as well), that primarily want to play their own game in terms of specific style, goals etc. Which is totally ok imo, but for public zergs it could be usefull, just to lower expectations imo. EDIT: and I know, that many commanders already lower their expectations when switching to open public tag and still get disappointed. Its maybe simply not clear to pugs, what each commander is up to, like the commander in this thread, that uses chat.

 

I know. We have very few good open tag commanders left. Many has becomes sour. Not that I can really blame them. I understand I just don't agree with it.

I think that if a commander goes open tag and expect the players to follow and understand, the commander needs to be vocal about the expectations. I know a handfull commanders like that. They help the squad to understand the expectations and by doing that help themselves to get the squad they want.

 

 

 

 

[enkidu.5937]

> @"Zajo.5946" said:

> I know. We have very few good open tag commanders left. Many has becomes sour. Not that I can really blame them. I understand I just don't agree with it.

> I think that if a commander goes open tag and expect the players to follow and understand, the commander needs to be vocal about the expectations. I know a handfull commanders like that. They help the squad to understand the expectations and by doing that help themselves to get the squad they want.

 

I still don't understand the problem. Why not just let everyone play as he / she likes and consequently win by quality (coordinated meta) + quantity (casuals, filling up the squad)?

 

TL, DR:

Naturally, one would tag up with ppl with the same attitude / goals / playstyle etc. Often, this doesn't work, because one needs a big group, to beat the enemy zerg and to tear down T3-keeps. So, imo tradeoffs have to be made, to get enough ppl together in one zerg, to get things done.

 

GW2 / WvW is not an E-sports title or comparable, so everyone plays a balanced mix of „what's my favorite playstyle“ and „what's the best strategy to win“. No one would permanently play something that is not fun, just to increase the win rate by 20%. And no one would permanently play fun builds, just to lose every single fight. Its the same for casuals, casual commanders, and meta-focussed fight commanders.

 

Especially among the latter ones, there are commanders, that are not very interested to win the match up at the end of the week, and even drive away casuals from their squad, just to lose outnumbered fights, they normally could have won. Or have a winning streak and still complain about bad movement and insufficient bombing, and thus losing even more numbers. So, the argument: „Everyone has to play strickly coordinated meta, because we want to win.“ seems invalid to me. Surely correct in theory, but obviously not in practice.

 

So, a commander wants to play coordinated. He / she can do that with that 25 ppl that also want to do that. And for winning, he / she can also invite additional 25 casuals, that don't fully meet the commander's expectations but usually still contribute by sheer numbers, and let them play their version of big-scale fights. Does a commander only have fun, when all 50 ppl strictly hold to his commands? That would be a bit of a problem then, because it's hard to get things done then in WvW.

[LetoII.3782]

Six years of evidence to the contrary, the snowflake bubble is impenetrable

[ThunderPanda.1872]

Learn from Cloud Fly

 

As long as the zerg don't get wiped pugs will keep playing. That means don't handicap yourself, build as many siege as you want, run away if it looks difficult and hide in structure as much as you want. Suck it up and do PPT when either you can't take on the opponents zerg or you lack the numbers. Accept the fact that pugs won't react 100% accordingly to what you envision so don't try playing like organized guild groups. Another small tip is to stack up around a corner, if you stack in the middle of the field, people would just run around everywhere.

 

Of course unless you have a decent guild core backing you, or you happen to command at a time when large amount of experienced off-hour members from other guilds cooperate well on ts/discord.

[XatraZaytrax.2601]

A helpful tip is to have a caller to keep people on task, like have them call "build siege left to right," "keep on tag," "moving to x bl," "moving to bay." That allows the commander to focus on strategy and type specific orders and people not in squad to not have to guess what's going on.

[shiri.4257]

capture middle fort and become a God of Pugs.

[ArchonWing.9480]

> @"enkidu.5937" said:

> > @"Zajo.5946" said:

> > I know. We have very few good open tag commanders left. Many has becomes sour. Not that I can really blame them. I understand I just don't agree with it.

> > I think that if a commander goes open tag and expect the players to follow and understand, the commander needs to be vocal about the expectations. I know a handfull commanders like that. They help the squad to understand the expectations and by doing that help themselves to get the squad they want.

>

> I still don't understand the problem. Why not just let everyone play as he / she likes and consequently win by quality (coordinated meta) + quantity (casuals, filling up the squad)?

>

> TL, DR:

> Naturally, one would tag up with ppl with the same attitude / goals / playstyle etc. Often, this doesn't work, because one needs a big group, to beat the enemy zerg and to tear down T3-keeps. So, imo tradeoffs have to be made, to get enough ppl together in one zerg, to get things done.

>

> GW2 / WvW is not an E-sports title or comparable, so everyone plays a balanced mix of „what's my favorite playstyle“ and „what's the best strategy to win“. No one would permanently play something that is not fun, just to increase the win rate by 20%. And no one would permanently play fun builds, just to lose every single fight. Its the same for casuals, casual commanders, and meta-focussed fight commanders.

>

> Especially among the latter ones, there are commanders, that are not very interested to win the match up at the end of the week, and even drive away casuals from their squad, just to lose outnumbered fights, they normally could have won. Or have a winning streak and still complain about bad movement and insufficient bombing, and thus losing even more numbers. So, the argument: „Everyone has to play strickly coordinated meta, because we want to win.“ seems invalid to me. Surely correct in theory, but obviously not in practice.

>

> So, a commander wants to play coordinated. He / she can do that with that 25 ppl that also want to do that. And for winning, he / she can also invite additional 25 casuals, that don't fully meet the commander's expectations but usually still contribute by sheer numbers, and let them play their version of big-scale fights. Does a commander only have fun, when all 50 ppl strictly hold to his commands? That would be a bit of a problem then, because it's hard to get things done then in WvW.

 

Because what isn't fun is thinking you have half the numbers you really have.

 

The problem is the game itself has a severe plague of "i play huuver i want", and that has led to some abysmal expectations. In the earlier part of the game when nobody had a clue, it was possible for some competent players to carry the rest. But now it's about people refusing to take the small effort of downloading discord or what not and forcing the commander to do extra things when they're already having to deal with awareness everywhere. Is it better for 30 people to put in a little bit of effort or force 1-3 people to much more be attentive? After a few more tries, and they're going to see it as a waste of time. And even excluding comms, people dying on the first push really doesn't contribute anything.

 

Yea, some people might not 1-push if they're not on comms, but it doesn't change the fact this is an exception and many other players aren't playing anywhere close to what they could be.

 

The thing here is that it is especially bad with so-called veterans of the game. In fact, new players willing to learn are not as bad, it's rather the old players that were once mediocre but haven't caught up with the times, stuck in their ways and never seek to get any better that are probably the bulk of the problem. Incidentally, they're also most likely to bash on the pugs when they are little better or arguably worse. But considering they often try to discourage others from getting better, I'd say they are worse. Basically, this elitist nonsense is also really bad.

[Turkeyspit.3965]

> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> Not so surprised to see the "You must use TS or Discord" posts though, even though there are some people that can't use it for various reasons or don't like to use it,

> again for various reasons. It doesn't take long to learn that you do your best to stick with the commander. It doesn't take long to realize that there are strategies involved > in how you zerg in WvW. It also doesn't take long to type out in map chat one word commands to better help those that aren't on TS or Discord to organize with those > that are. The commander can designate one of the backliners to relay information from TS or Discord in map chat to those that aren't and things will go a lot smoother > than trying to do it without trying to clue in those that aren't on TS or Discord. Problem is is that most commanders have some kind of an elitist attitude that makes

> them not want to include those players unwilling or unable to conform to their demands.

 

In my opinion, unless the player is hearing impaired, there is no valid excuse. None of the pugmanders I've run with insist on a microphone, just that you be in TS/Discord to hear their instructions. If for some reason someone needs to play with the volume off, then that's fine, then go roam solo and dont expect to be accepted into a squad in WvW.

 

I don't think that is too much to ask of anyone....

 

 

[ArchonWing.9480]

Asking things of people is toxic. I should be allowed to just mindlessly press 1 and not pay attention to anything else. I mean it works. If anything happens, it's because they could have done better. I do like 300 damage to the zerg before I die. That's my contribution.

 

I bought this game!!11111111 I can do whatever I want with it!

[Celsith.2753]

> @"oOStaticOo.9467" said:

> I'm surprised we haven't seen the "Be toxic to the pugs" posts because pugs are horrible for WvW. Not so surprised to see the "You must use TS or Discord" posts though, even though there are some people that can't use it for various reasons or don't like to use it, again for various reasons. It doesn't take long to learn that you do your best to stick with the commander. It doesn't take long to realize that there are strategies involved in how you zerg in WvW. It also doesn't take long to type out in map chat one word commands to better help those that aren't on TS or Discord to organize with those that are. The commander can designate one of the backliners to relay information from TS or Discord in map chat to those that aren't and things will go a lot smoother than trying to do it without trying to clue in those that aren't on TS or Discord. Problem is is that most commanders have some kind of an elitist attitude that makes them not want to include those players unwilling or unable to conform to their demands.

 

I have found that those that can't use voice comms because of hearing difficulty are very good at sticking with the pin and watching around them to know whats going on.

Those that just don't want to though.... Why on earth should a backliner lose out on fighting to type for them? If people don't want to comms they need to look after themselves and be a lot more aware than many of them are. It's a team mode and not playing as a team is toxic to me if you're with the commander. S/he doesn't HAVE to command, why not make their game time - that they are prepared to use to help lead and help others - as pleasant and easy for them as possible?

[Tongku.5326]

> @"Condoriano.2438" said:

> Hello, im a commander and the current MU im in our side of pugs seems to chaotic. they dont join squad take ages for them to respond when you move. when you stop for 3 seconds you get milions of afk. If there is anyone that could give me ticks and tricks would be awsome.

 

Hi

 

Some things that are somewhat successful that I have seen and tried over the years come to mind, but note that they are not immediate, its more of a longterm plan.

 

For 1st week or 2 run just completely open raids just so people get to know you a bit and you get to know them.

 

After that start focusing a bit on team comp and comms, ask nicely to get on comms etc. but continue to keep it open, while comp wise ask if some people could switch to more of what you need, and some of them will.

 

After about a month or so change the raids to be open to anyone but from comms only, pop comm info in map chat of whatever map you are running on, keep raid open but from comms only, then get more focused on the comp and just keep progressing.

 

Once you get enough people to have an effective closed raid, do so, but keep a few spots open for invites from outside your raid, keep the invites from comms only.

 

[Gemnaid.4219]

Yell at them. Then rage quit.

[enkidu.5937]

> @"Zajo.5946" said:

> Yes, I hear you and I am inclined to agree with you. But I still think it's backwards.

Just to add this, I totally agree with supporting commanders. Pls take my post as an addition :)

 

 

[Turkeyspit.3965]

Dare I suggest you grab a copy of

http://oi64.tinypic.com/2a6owfk.jpg

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Rayya.2591]

> @"Condoriano.2438" said:

> Hello, im a commander and the current MU im in our side of pugs seems to chaotic. they dont join squad take ages for them to respond when you move. when you stop for 3 seconds you get milions of afk. If there is anyone that could give me ticks and tricks would be awsome.

 

they don't trust the commander, that's why they don't join. They go afk because there is not enough action or entertaiment to keep them there.