Since a lot of pve players got the warclaw...

[Deimos.4263]

"WvW players" are unsurprisingly territorial, but they don't own the mode. You *don't* have to join a zerg just because you're on the map. You can solo roam, you can join or make a havoc squad, you can go do the catmander jumping puzzle, get your vistas or dailies, get your warclaw, whatever you want. Get out there and have fun!

 

Good commanders realize morale is a thing, and communicate effectively and calmly even under a stressful situation, so you'll *want* to join them. Raging commanders tend to lose their squads in a hurry. But those are relatively rare.

 

More often you'll get a toxic team member in chat and this situation isn't really different from elsewhere - these people are usually wrong and projecting their flaws upon everyone else. They can be safely ignored.

[Voltekka.2375]

> @"Deimos.4263" said:

> "WvW players" are unsurprisingly territorial, but they don't own the mode. You *don't* have to join a zerg just because you're on the map. You can solo roam, you can join or make a havoc squad, you can go do the catmander jumping puzzle, get your vistas or dailies, get your warclaw, whatever you want. Get out there and have fun!

>

> Good commanders realize morale is a thing, and communicate effectively and calmly even under a stressful situation, so you'll *want* to join them. Raging commanders tend to lose their squads in a hurry. But those are relatively rare.

>

> More often you'll get a toxic team member in chat and this situation isn't really different from elsewhere - these people are usually wrong and projecting their flaws upon everyone else. They can be safely ignored.

 

Morale comes from winning fights. Morale drops from losing fights. The toxic, screaming fight server comm (fight servers are infamous for their elitism and toxicity) will farm the average high morale "everyone welcome to squad!" compositions. Thats how it goes.

[Duckota.4769]

> @"Deimos.4263" said:

> "WvW players" are unsurprisingly territorial, but they don't own the mode. You *don't* have to join a zerg just because you're on the map. You can solo roam, you can join or make a havoc squad, you can go do the catmander jumping puzzle, get your vistas or dailies, get your warclaw, whatever you want. Get out there and have fun!

>

> Good commanders realize morale is a thing, and communicate effectively and calmly even under a stressful situation, so you'll *want* to join them. Raging commanders tend to lose their squads in a hurry. But those are relatively rare.

>

> More often you'll get a toxic team member in chat and this situation isn't really different from elsewhere - these people are usually wrong and projecting their flaws upon everyone else. They can be safely ignored.

 

A lot of the toxicity had to do with major objectives getting flipped while people who could have properly defended them were stuck in queue. Meanwhile in the maps we're losing T3 keeps while PvE players flip camps and kill guards. I get what they were doing, and why, but to daily or 'WvW only' players I believe they were a bit tilted. However to me its not a big deal. That is the problem though. It should have been a big deal. Winning/losing the week prior should have rewards and should be a semi-big deal where you want to win and do the best you can. However that doesn't exist currently. I'm not saying any one person had the right to be toxic. I'm just saying it was annoying in the best of situations to watch.

[Excursion.9752]

I did not play WvW before. I got the warclaw and quickly obtained 5 GoB's. Now I'm sitting here 122 ranks later. Mobility = Happiness.

[Loosmaster.8263]

> @"Kaliwenda.3428" said:

> My main who earned the warclaw is a ranger, and while I love her to pieces, I wouldn't be opposed to creating a different character for use in WvW.

>

> Where would I look to get more information about builds that are better suited to WvW? Is it a flavor of the month kindof thing, or generally more stable in terms of a build I could stick with?

 

https://metabattle.com. This is one source you can use. I think currently the Meta is Fire Brand, Scourge and Revenant.

[Kaliwenda.3428]

> @"Loosmaster.8263" said:

> > @"Kaliwenda.3428" said:

> > My main who earned the warclaw is a ranger, and while I love her to pieces, I wouldn't be opposed to creating a different character for use in WvW.

> >

> > Where would I look to get more information about builds that are better suited to WvW? Is it a flavor of the month kindof thing, or generally more stable in terms of a build I could stick with?

>

> https://metabattle.com. This is one source you can use. I think currently the Meta is Fire Brand, Scourge and Revenant.

 

Thank you , that's exactly what I was looking for. :)

[kratan.4619]

I never join a squad in WvW, just zerg surf. Nobody can kick me out that way if I am playing wrong class/spec/whatever. I stayed long enough to get the mount then left again.

[Turkeyspit.3965]

> @"JustTrogdor.7892" said:

> Prior to Warclaw I had only dabbled in WvW but never really gave it a chance. I mostly just used WvW for easy dailys. It took me about 6 hours to get the mount playing on and off over two days. I actually learned a lot about the game mode and found I enjoyed it more than I thought. Since getting the Warclaw I have played WvW more and I plan to continue doing so. To be honest WvW won't be my primary game mode but I'll certainly play it more now. Also I found a nice additional bonus in the form of earning a lot of Testimony of Heroics. This allowed me to finally finish HoT map completion for the first time since I had a lot of problems getting all those hero points. I can't speak for others but the mount collection did give me a better introduction to WvW than I had in the past and increased my interest in playing the game mode more.

 

In addition to the Testimony of Heroics, continued play in WvW will allow you to also get tons of Transmutation Charges as well as Tomes of Knowledge, which makes creating alt characters a breeze.

[Turkeyspit.3965]

> @"Kaliwenda.3428" said:

> My main who earned the warclaw is a ranger, and while I love her to pieces, I wouldn't be opposed to creating a different character for use in WvW.

>

> Where would I look to get more information about builds that are better suited to WvW? Is it a flavor of the month kindof thing, or generally more stable in terms of a build I could stick with?

 

Depends on what you want to do in WvW, as the builds for someone solo / small group roaming and those who play in large squads (zerg) are very different. Ranger isn't an ideal choice for large organized squads, but it's perfect for solo and small group roaming.

 

But generally speaking, preferred builds for zergs will be:

Heal/Support Firebrand

Medi-Scrapper

Scourge

Hammer Herald

Power Weaver

Heal Tempest

Spellbreaker

 

Mesmers are often included to provide pulls, portals and veils.

 

Everything else is normally taken for roaming, the stronger ones being

Soulbeast

Holosmith

Condi Mirage / Power Mirage

Thief S/D / Rifle Deadeye

 

So first decide what you want to do, then pick the profession you enjoy the most and give it a whirl. Metabattle will give you a good starting point for builds: https://metabattle.com/wiki/WvW

 

[JustTrogdor.7892]

> @"Turkeyspit.3965" said:

> > @"JustTrogdor.7892" said:

> > Prior to Warclaw I had only dabbled in WvW but never really gave it a chance. I mostly just used WvW for easy dailys. It took me about 6 hours to get the mount playing on and off over two days. I actually learned a lot about the game mode and found I enjoyed it more than I thought. Since getting the Warclaw I have played WvW more and I plan to continue doing so. To be honest WvW won't be my primary game mode but I'll certainly play it more now. Also I found a nice additional bonus in the form of earning a lot of Testimony of Heroics. This allowed me to finally finish HoT map completion for the first time since I had a lot of problems getting all those hero points. I can't speak for others but the mount collection did give me a better introduction to WvW than I had in the past and increased my interest in playing the game mode more.

>

> In addition to the Testimony of Heroics, continued play in WvW will allow you to also get tons of Transmutation Charges as well as Tomes of Knowledge, which makes creating alt characters a breeze.

 

Yeah that is a bonus for those that need them but I already have tons of those from other game play and login rewards. So I didn't consider it note worthy in my case. :smile:

[Rauderi.8706]

Ha, it's only going to get worse. After enough people get Warclaw, it will be effectively *required* to participate enough to get a Gift of Battle.

Which I still don't want to do, because it's *still boring*. Go figure.

But those who haven't joined the rush to get it early will need to do an extra reward track just to keep up and maintain participation. And they'll also be more likely to be targeted by toxic players! So, that's a bonus. /s

 

[Dami.5046]

I did mine mostly in the mists apart the camp. Had no issues on my SB going around. It's a sad state of affairs that I have to thank someone to allow me to join up just because I was on a ranger and people just troll on them. But nonetheless the zergs I joined did perfectly well apart from the odd few comms that just decided to join the map they were queuing and leave the group standing or the usual 'drag the noobs in another zerg' piece some like to do.

I found the chat during the time I was there to be truly pathetic and pure showing off. Quite funny as well. Such an ironic part of the game.

 

[Turkeyspit.3965]

> @"Dami.5046" said:

> I did mine mostly in the mists apart the camp. Had no issues on my SB going around. It's a sad state of affairs that I have to thank someone to allow me to join up just because I was on a ranger and people just troll on them. But nonetheless the zergs I joined did perfectly well apart from the odd few comms that just decided to join the map they were queuing and leave the group standing or the usual 'drag the noobs in another zerg' piece some like to do.

> I found the chat during the time I was there to be truly pathetic and pure showing off. Quite funny as well. Such an ironic part of the game.

>

 

You don't WvW regularly, so it's a perfectly understandable reaction. I used to think exactly the same way, but once I started playing WvW fairly regularly the perspective changes. People seem to have this notion that WvW is like a World Boss or an open world meta event, where what profession/build you play doesn't matter, and you don't have to work as a team but can do your own thing and get loots. When two opposing squads attack each other in WvW, builds matter, player skill and strategy does matter (despite what bitter roamers like to tell themselves). How do I know that? I've been in a squad of 15 that scattered a group of 30. I've seen a 50 person blob from server #1 engage similar sized blobs from server #2 and #3 at the same time, and come out the victor.

 

So when commanders say they don't want rangers, it isn't because they hate rangers, it's because they aren't as suited for that type of WvW play as other specs. In my example above, that 30 person group undoubtedly contained many non-meta zerg builds (Rangers, Thieves, etc) and/or inexperienced players, while mine was full of experienced players on comms running meta builds following a commander who knew how to drive. Had their group been similarly composed, we never would have stood a chance.

 

You said that your zerg did perfectly well. No doubt, but that's because the enemy zerg was similarly composed of players new to WvW running whatever build they wanted. Don't believe me? Jump into a group this Friday at reset when the serious players come out, and see what it's like to fight a 50 person squad of players from the same guild, all on voice comms and staying on tag. An opposing group running off meta builds or players not on comms or squirreling after sentries or dolyaks will get steamrolled 100 out of 100 fights.

 

There is no excuse for people being mean or saying hurtful things, but it didn't happen in a vacuum, and for every jerk of a player who said nasty things, there were probably 5 players who were equally annoyed, but had the respect to keep their mouth shut. Myself, while I have no issues with new players coming in to WvW, the reality is that while I had fun this past week, it wasn't the WvW I was used to, nor the quality of gameplay that keeps me coming back day after day; it didn't start to resemble "normal" until Sunday/Monday.

 

Not every game mode is for everyone. Many PvE players claim WvW is boring and not for them, and that's fine; but just because they feel that way, doesn't mean that's how everyone else feels. Many truly enjoy WvW, despite its flaws, so it's very understandable when their preferred game mode for GW2 gets tossed on its head because of an event. There are plenty of folks like me who started as pure PvE, but after dipping my toe into WvW, I started to play it more and more, and now I spend about half my in game time in WvW. And the change only came after I stopped criticizing how WvW players choose to play WvW, and instead asked questions, learned, and followed their example.

 

Something to think about.

 

[Kagusaki.3176]

> @"kratan.4619" said:

> I never join a squad in WvW, just zerg surf. Nobody can kick me out that way if I am playing wrong class/spec/whatever. I stayed long enough to get the mount then left again.

 

This is the reason why the WvW community gets toxic when PvErs flood the maps. No proper gear, basic WvW knowledge, or TS3/Discord = toxic environment. I'm okay with PvErs being in WvW but at least have a desire to play and communicate with others.

 

When the Warclaw was added, I was hoping that some of the PvErs would stay and revitalize WvW. Instead they just ran in and pushed everyone out of their way like if it was black friday at Walmart. This was the reason why I wondered why Anet did not put a minimum WvW rank requirement for getting the Warclaw. Any PvErs who were serious in getting the Warclaw will need to learn the proper builds and work with one another to achieve their goals.

 

Speaking of which, I don't understand why PvErs say they hate getting the Gift of Battle. I would rather do that reward track than trying to get world completion for the Gift of Exploration. I've been playing this game since 2012 and I'm not even 90% done with world completion lol

[Dondarrion.2748]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> A big issue with the PvE players flooding WvW maps to get their Warclaw were the queues. It was not the players' fault, but suddenly many WvW players found themselves unable to actually play the game mode they enjoy because a lot of players, most of which would leave WvW rather quickly, wanted to get their Warclaw. It's no surprise that there was so much negativity against PvE players on team chat.

 

And the same happened for both of the previous WvW tournaments and the stream of PvE players flooding WvW to complete their meta achievements.

 

 

[Dondarrion.2748]

> @"Deimos.4263" said:

> "WvW players" are unsurprisingly territorial, but they don't own the mode. You *don't* have to join a zerg just because you're on the map. You can solo roam, you can join or make a havoc squad, you can go do the catmander jumping puzzle, get your vistas or dailies, get your warclaw, whatever you want. Get out there and have fun!

 

You can do all those things, but generally you're likely taking up the place of someone who would contribute to the world's success in WvW while you're there minding your own "PvE" business. The game mode pits players from three worlds against each other for conquest domination - if everyone ran around without a concerted effort at achieving the goals of the WvW game mode, the performance of that world would suffer. So, by not contributing to the greater good you're actually ruining it for those who play this the majority of their time in GW2. True, they don't own the mode, but I get why they feel salty when events such as these impact their performance.

[Gaberen.4325]

Since the influx of all the pve players is now gone. I can now say that according to me, warclaw did absolutely nothing. The borders feels even more empty now, than before the warclaw. The warclaw in mu opinion is just completely garbage and is not what WvW needed. But whatever, lost faith in Anet long ago and im only waiting for the next game.

[Etria.3642]

I love the fact that Warclaw let's me get to my commander quickly while also letting me skip past the pesky thief trolling my spawn.

 

I ALSO like that warclaw allows the enemy zerg to get it's members back quickly. Been some epic fights out there.

[Rasimir.6239]

> @"Dondarrion.2748" said:

> if everyone ran around without a concerted effort at achieving the goals of the WvW game mode, the performance of that world would suffer. So, by not contributing to the greater good you're actually ruining it for **those who play this the majority of their time** in GW2.

You mean the gankers that hang around enemy spawns all day trying to get some cheap kills? The duellers that roam around Stonemist Castle or the southern borderlands trying to find people to 1vs1? The fight guilds that couldn't care less about objectives as long as they have zergs to fight? The karma trains that only take objectives and never defend, hoping the enemy takes them back in time so they can keep with their ever-lasting circle of taking over enemy fortifications? The commanders with their guild squads that all think they know best and end up losing their borderlands because they cling to their "perfect" strategy and refuse to cooperate with the other guilds that cling to different "perfect" strategies?

 

I don't know what server you are on, but if there are server where most of the wvw community actually agrees on strategy and works coordinated, I doubt there's all that many of them. And even if there is, those people still don't own the server or game mode, no more than any pve guild owns a world event. There are hardcore wvw players of all shapes and sizes, including rangers better at defending objectives, playing strategically, and even supporting a zerk (guild or public) than many players of the so-called "useful" classes.

 

Calling people out for being "pve-ers" and "not contributing" is uncalled for in any gamemode. You can play wvw and aid your server in a vast variety of ways just like you can do raids and t4 fractals with non-meta setups as long as people really know their classes and encounters and tailor their builds accordingly. And there will always be people new to the game mode that need to gain their own experience to perfect their gameplay. Nobody needs to feel bad for not playing the way you think the game mode should be played.

[Fremtid.3528]

> @"Erasculio.2914" said:

> A big issue with the PvE players flooding WvW maps to get their Warclaw were the queues. It was not the players' fault, but suddenly many WvW players found themselves unable to actually play the game mode they enjoy because a lot of players, most of which would leave WvW rather quickly, wanted to get their Warclaw. It's no surprise that there was so much negativity against PvE players on team chat.

>

> Of course, the fact it was no surprise doesn't mean it was acceptable. The chance of PvE players who were there just for the Warclaw to actually move to WvW was reduced with all the trash talking. In my server, I had never seen that kind of negativity in team chat.

>

> It's the kind of thing ArenaNet could have planned better, but anyway, now it's too late.

>

> One thing surprising me, though, is how some players are saying they are amazed because commanders have accepted them in their squads even when playing as professions that are not widely popular. I don't play GW2 THAT much, sure, but I have never seen a commander kick a player from his/her squad just because of the character's profession. Most of the time, one extra character is more a positive than a negative.

 

Not only that, the first day on hbl on my server the pve players were practically screaming for us to stop defending our t3 keeps and just let the enemy have them coz they needed to cap a keep for the achievement nvm the fact that they'd still have to do 8 hours of a reward track before they could get a mount, but no REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE keep cap, stop defending reeeeee, and a lot of the regulars weren't having it which DID breed a lot of toxicity, yeah. So ppl WERE saying if you don't like it leave and cap a keep in EoTM. But of course the argument there was no pips in EoTM. When we finally lost hills, bay was also under attack, but literally every idiot stayed at hills coz achievie achievie. Even tho 5 mins of RI. (I tagged a guard and ran to defend bay even tho we lost that too.) But honestly, the way they set this up is ANYONE surprised there was toxicity?

[Gehenna.3625]

I think it's possible because people often hate on things they don't know or don't know very well. If they stuck it out for the mount, they know they can do it for the gift of battle as well. I'm sure some people will complain but it should be less indeed.

[Danikat.8537]

After seeing some of the discussions in WvW over the last week - after the event ended - I'm coming to the conclusion that part of the reason PvE players are seen as a problem in WvW is that there isn't actually any practical way to tell which game mode/s people play most - especially when you're only seeing their name in chat, but anyone who certainly people want to complain about, for playing 'badly', for using the wrong build, for not following the commander, for 'blindly' following the commander when they were obviously wrong etc. is accused of being a PvE player and anyone who is considered acceptable (or just not noticed) is assumed to be a regular WvW player.

 

It's lead to some absurd arguments when someone accuses another person of being a "PvEer" and then they get into a ridiculous contest to try and prove they're more serious about WvW than the other person by spamming chat with claims no one could confirm or deny even if they cared to do so about how 'dedicated' they are to WvW.

 

As far as I can see it's becoming a bit of a stereotype at this point. If someone is deemed a bad player they get called a PvEer, and that then "proves" that all PvEers are bad players...even though many of us are right there dipping into WvW for a bit but not attracting enough notice to get yelled at directly.

[JustANoob.2798]

> @"Kagusaki.3176" said:

> > @"kratan.4619" said:

> > I never join a squad in WvW, just zerg surf. Nobody can kick me out that way if I am playing wrong class/spec/whatever. I stayed long enough to get the mount then left again.

>

> This is the reason why the WvW community gets toxic when PvErs flood the maps. No proper gear, basic WvW knowledge, or TS3/Discord = toxic environment. I'm okay with PvErs being in WvW but at least have a desire to play and communicate with others.

>

> When the Warclaw was added, I was hoping that some of the PvErs would stay and revitalize WvW. Instead they just ran in and pushed everyone out of their way like if it was black friday at Walmart. This was the reason why I wondered why Anet did not put a minimum WvW rank requirement for getting the Warclaw. Any PvErs who were serious in getting the Warclaw will need to learn the proper builds and work with one another to achieve their goals.

>

> Speaking of which, I don't understand why PvErs say they hate getting the Gift of Battle. I would rather do that reward track than trying to get world completion for the Gift of Exploration. I've been playing this game since 2012 and I'm not even 90% done with world completion lol

 

I am one of those PvE'r and a rank requirement would not have stopped me. I am rank 56.