Hi, I go far

Well this happens all the time especially in mid low ranks like I happen to be now due to a great 12 loss streak from plat to g3.

Game is about to start and usually a warrior, a bunker druid or a bunker ele will either declare or worse they will just go far. In these ranks kiting or in general the team sustain isn't that great and the result 9/10 times is a wipe and a clear early advantage for the enemy. Don't get me wrong I know this split favors some maps but shouldn't the 'far guy' at least check his team comp and the opponents' comp before taking such a decision? Or would it hurt getting mid then go cap/decap far with ease?

It may sound salty but I think these type of players watch too much YT videos from high ranked players and just try to mimic without thinking or understanding why and how experienced players do it. So to sum it up please first think then take action. :)

If you run a handful of certain builds that's just what you do. High end players with side-node monkey builds still just push sides fairly mindlessly.

Solo rank strategy its always best to send your strongest home, and 4mid. Players doing 1-3-1 usually ends up with mid getting owned and then home shortly after.

From my personal experiences if I see no one worth trusting mid then I'll grab home to cap and then move mid to help clean up that's if no one goes to my home node. Usually they don't.... Unless it's an actual plat level match up then that's where you can focus on doing 1-3-1depending on the team comp of course.

@Chaith.8256 said:If you run a handful of certain builds that's just what you do. High end players with side-node monkey builds still just push sides fairly mindlessly.Totally agree with you even though from high plat vids I check I don't see any bunkers anymore. Maybe with the power creep it might be their survivability has diminished. I am not talking about the obvious where experienced players know when and how to do something. I am talking about players rotating like robots towards a specific cap point. The game is dynamic and not fixed, situations change, rotations may also change. Help cap, +1 an undecided group fight, help a mate being chased and so on. Don't perma go to one point because you are a duelist or a bunker build. Look map, try understand what's going on and decide.

@PopDaGod.9346 said:Solo rank strategy its always best to send your strongest home, and 4mid. Players doing 1-3-1 usually ends up with mid getting owned and then home shortly after.Exactly this.

@PopDaGod.9346 said:Solo rank strategy its always best to send your strongest home, and 4mid. Players doing 1-3-1 usually ends up with mid getting owned and then home shortly after.

Not necessarily true. Mid fights can last pretty long and if the 3 mid players can survive until the home player rotates to mid, it becomes an even fight again. It's also possible for mid to be won 3v4 without the help of the home player but usually the home player comes mid to even things out. 1-3-1 is not bad if you have a strong side noder to contest far and a reasonably sustainy mid comp.

@Les.4872 said:

@PopDaGod.9346 said:Solo rank strategy its always best to send your strongest home, and 4mid. Players doing 1-3-1 usually ends up with mid getting owned and then home shortly after.

Just to build up on that.

If you see you are in a 1-3-1 situation you should not jump into mid fight and eat all the AoE.Your job in mid when outnumbered is to keep them busy so they can't send someone to side nodes and just try to keep the node contested.

I've seen a lot of times people rush mid, get crushed in 2 secs by double necro AoE with guard support, then complain about the people that are on side nodes.

Don't blame your team for your own blind rush and suicide.

1-3-1 is the superior way to fight usually. As stated above, the 3 just need to not die and allow the home node to come in for the 4v4 and then you're at a large advantage rotation wise.

If the 3 run in, die to 4 like monkeys, and then your home or far get crashed on.. yeah that's not ideal. Some builds are just fit to being a monkey and rushing far 24/7 though.

@"Chaith.8256" said:If you run a handful of certain builds that's just what you do. High end players with side-node monkey builds still just push sides fairly mindlessly."mindlessly" is a bit unfair. At the start of the match you have no idea how well your team will do at mid and close, so you just go where your build is meant to go and hope the other guys can handle their own fights.Or was that what you meant? I can't actually tell if you are trying to slam people that go far or defend the practice.

@Dreddo.9865 said:

@"Chaith.8256" said:If you run a handful of certain builds that's just what you do. High end players with side-node monkey builds still just push sides fairly mindlessly.Totally agree with you even though from high plat vids I check I don't see any bunkers anymore. Maybe with the power creep it might be their survivability has diminished. I am not talking about the obvious where experienced players know when and how to do something. I am talking about players rotating like robots towards a specific cap point. The game is dynamic and not fixed, situations change, rotations may also change. Help cap, +1 an undecided group fight, help a mate being chased and so on. Don't perma go to one point because you are a duelist or a bunker build. Look map, try understand what's going on and decide.

You hardly have to be a "bunker" to go far. The only real requirement for a far build is that it must be able to survive a thief +1, and have some way to exit stage left if the fight goes south.

Hi go far! Welcome to the forum! o/Sorry couldn't resist

To the topic: You can easily survive 3 v 4 if all of your team members pay attention to each other and use out each other (checking what fields your allies drop and such). It is not just the far going players duty to check its team capabilities but everyone has to do it.

In short....uhm? Teamwork is the key? I guess

The reason to go far is when the other side has an overpowering advantage at mid. I don't know how many times I've pressed b and seen 2 scourge and an fb and/or ele. Our side often doesn't have a comparable setup and I'll suggest pushing sides 3-2.

More often than not... My team goes for the "mid no matter what" strategy and wipes. I'll hang back or drop a defensive portal and try to mitigate the inevitable snowball.

That said, the war who calls far usually dies rapidly, leaving mid weak. Even worse is the war who sprints for home, leaving me to try to fill the gap, mid.

@"Dreddo.9865" said:Well this happens all the time especially in mid low ranks like I happen to be now due to a great 12 loss streak from plat to g3.

Game is about to start and usually a warrior, a bunker druid or a bunker ele will either declare or worse they will just go far. In these ranks kiting or in general the team sustain isn't that great and the result 9/10 times is a wipe and a clear early advantage for the enemy. Don't get me wrong I know this split favors some maps but shouldn't the 'far guy' at least check his team comp and the opponents' comp before taking such a decision? Or would it hurt getting mid then go cap/decap far with ease?

It may sound salty but I think these type of players watch too much YT videos from high ranked players and just try to mimic without thinking or understanding why and how experienced players do it. So to sum it up please first think then take action. :)

The 1-4-0 split is still probably one of the most common however 1-3-1 helps counter this providing the mid 3 don't go too hard against the 4 opponents there and wipe quickly. The strat does to a degree rely on the far runner being able to sustain 1v1 for a while and your home capper rushing to mid ASAP. The key I've found is watching the minimap to be aware of where your team decide to go if they aren't so good with communicating this in chat.Had a match recently where the team went for a 2-1-2 split with no warning, so being the only one running mid, I had to pull away and head far to avoid getting destroyed. Somehow this resulted in us getting home and far and penning in the 4 at mid and beating them. Our team continued to out-rotate until the end of the match but that opener was neither expected, nor communicated..Yes, there needs to be cohesion to decisions made but (sometimes) when someone makes a choice to go with a certain strategy, unfortunately you have to work with that. It's not that the player has made a "bad" move, it's just that the choice of 1 person to do something can result in the other 4 being practically forced to go with that plan. If your warrior/druid/etc runs far - the mid party is forced to play safe and not over-commit to mid node, and if they ignore this, then they're more likely to wipe.

IMO - don't blame the far runner for the mid loss.

The problem in lower tiers is that people never play careful in mid. They will just run on the node and get oneshot even if you can already see the coreguards putting their warning signs up. 1-3-1 and 1-4 are both viable splits and it usually depends on the comp what you should do. If the enemy has Fb/Scourge and you neither have that nor enough burst to bring the FB down quickly (bursting the nec is pretty much obsolete due to mercy signet) it wouldn't be wise to commit 4 people to a teamfight you're most likely going to lose.

@Les.4872 said:If you see you are in a 1-3-1 situation you should not jump into mid fight and eat all the AoE.Your job in mid when outnumbered is to keep them busy so they can't send someone to side nodes and just try to keep the node contested.Don't blame your team for your own blind rush and suicide.

You can't always predict how a 3v4 fight can evolve. Can give you many scenarios (classes involved, map, etc) use your imagination a bit. This kind of generalisation "is your fault" "teamwork" etc is not fitting in a dynamic environment such as PvP is. There are no rules or fixed rotations, it's about experience, judgement and calling the right decisions.

@"Crinn.7864" said:You hardly have to be a "bunker" to go far. The only real requirement for a far build is that it must be able to survive a thief +1, and have some way to exit stage left if the fight goes south.You are right of course. I just have noticed that players with such builds more than often tend to ignore the battle details and just go to do their thing.

@Ithilwen.1529 said:The reason to go far is when the other side has an overpowering advantage at mid. I don't know how many times I've pressed b and seen 2 scourge and an fb and/or ele. Our side often doesn't have a comparable setup and I'll suggest pushing sides 3-2.I am not debating whether the 1-3-1 split is right or wrong. Of course it has advantages over certain team comps and allow me to notice how the exact opposite happens - what you rightly refer to when you should avoid the mid fight. :)For what you say I 'll give you one example in a match I had yesterday where the warrior of my team kept going close after dueling and dying to their warrior again and again. He died 3 or 4 times before I yelled at him. I mean when you see you can't beat an enemy what is the point of keeping the same rotation over and over? Rhetorical but happens so often.

@"MarshallLaw.9260" said:Yes, there needs to be cohesion to decisions made but (sometimes) when someone makes a choice to go with a certain strategy, unfortunately you have to work with that. It's not that the player has made a "bad" move, it's just that the choice of 1 person to do something can result in the other 4 being practically forced to go with that plan. If your warrior/druid/etc runs far - the mid party is forced to play safe and not over-commit to mid node, and if they ignore this, then they're more likely to wipe.

IMO - don't blame the far runner for the mid loss.Well to have the 'far guy' dictating a team strategy isn't kinda unfair for the rest of the team? Is like I am joining a team and do whatever I want not caring for the rest of my mates. Then again you probably forget I am talking about mid-low ranks. Ranks where people are inexperienced, usually rotating without evaluating the situation (aka look the map), taking fights where death is certain, can't kite, can't stay alive for long, and so on. Now put all these into the mix and think it all over.

I have many times witnessed close matches where a wrong move (yes just one wrong rotation usually) was the decisive factor for the match outcome. I have also witnessed matches where I was able to down all enemies with ease yet loosing because my team kept rotating mindlessly and dying. There are so many examples. My point though is that in this kind of level you have to play simple. Sometimes just doing the basics is the most efficient way to win with ease.

@Dreddo.9865 said:Guys do you understand I am talking about mid-low ranks?

Yeh man. Even 1-3-1 is especially strong in lower ranks because even if you lose mid, a good player at far can force enemy rotates to them and make room for another mid retake. Also the likelyhood of the enemy team sending people far when their home is contested is very slim in lower ranks. But same rules as before so both strategies work still. Depends on your team really. You dont want to go mid if you have say 2 mesmers or 2 thieves on your team. So Improvise!

@Les.4872 said:

@Dreddo.9865 said:Guys do you understand I am talking about mid-low ranks?

But its not a good player going far without speaking up prematch more often then not in low to mid ranks. Its often not even on a side point specialist. Also, contesting middle 3v4 without dieing also requires a certain skill level. My opinion is in solo queue its much safer to just split 4 to 1 unless everything is discussed before hand. All these things you and others pushing 3-1-1 involve everyone having a certain skill level and coordination where in a lot of cases it doesnt exist. Also, I dont feel what a lot of you are saying about 3-1-1 plays out in actuality record wise in solo queue. Would be interesting to track my record based on opening splits. I would bet because of the poor matchmaking and the tendency to load one side with better players the opening split is meaningless most of the time.

@Chaith.8256 said:If you run a handful of certain builds that's just what you do. High end players with side-node monkey builds still just push sides fairly mindlessly.

Agree but with the current balance and state of the game, they are rewarded for such monkey behavior. This has always been a problem in pvp; Bad players doing bad plays being rewarded by monkey specs.

@Jalal.6783 said:

@"Chaith.8256" said:If you run a handful of certain builds that's just what you do. High end players with side-node monkey builds still just push sides fairly mindlessly.

I made a thread about this a while ago, people didn't seem to understand.

Going far wins games. If you are good enough you can keep 33% of the game on lockdown. You win every 1v1 and guarantee a point. When you get 1v2d you stall or rotate out, leaving your team 4v3 or 5v3 on home mid for a few seconds.

Problems arise when people go far and lose, fight on the enemy node, or fail to rotate out when the enemy stops feeding kills.

Point is, a good player can often control more of the game by 1v1ing far than by going mid. If you had a really strong fb/sg you could even 2-2-1 and 2v1 far while stalling the 2v4 until your team caps home and wins far leaving you 4v4 mid, enemy on respawn, and 2 capping vs a neut 30s into the game.

@Jalal.6783 said:

@Chaith.8256 said:If you run a handful of certain builds that's just what you do. High end players with side-node monkey builds still just push sides fairly mindlessly.

Monkey specs only work so well due to the solo content we play in.....

It's hard communicating and co-ordinating with a bunch of randoms who have team chat turned off so it becomes easier to take advantage of that

@Dreddo.9865 said:

@Les.4872 said:crop

I don't think the player who goes far is dictating the game more than other players. I do think it's a fair sentiment. In my opinion thieves and mesmers with portal used to have far more control over the strategy of their team (they decide where to go and have a vast range of options in terms of map movement), and things like support firebrand have almost none (they need to stick somewhat near their necro; who literally ends up deciding what to do for them because even if they're bad, it's rarely a better option to let them die and go elsewhere).

The problem is not going far. Obviously players who repeatedly die far arent' exactly helping; but still. You shouldn't even look to your teams actions too much; it doesn't matter. If they repeatedly play bad; play better than them and you'll climb past anyways. During HoT I played ~250+ games on shoutbow druid. I went far 90% of the time. There's no value in me going mid; the burst is pretty lacking and by the time I have built up enough CA to be supportive I've wasted quite a substantial amount of time. Going mid at the start of the game is was just a bad choice for the spec I was playing. Obviously, if there was a condi warrior camping far (one of the hardest counters at a certain point) then I'm not going to 1v1 and die. I'll just retreat to mid anyways.

I've very regularly seen players go 3v4 mid; then flame their team when they all wipe. If one person dies in mid to four players, they most likely fucked up but it's understandable. At this point the other two need to leg it; you will not win 2v4. Sure, they kill a necro and then the immobile fb is stuck and gets trained 4v2. Fair enough. But if all three actually stay and fight / die in the 3v4; it's 100% their fault. If the necro walks into mid node as 3v4 while qq'ing about the guy going far then gets one shot... Yeah what can I say?

In PvP, each player is responsible for THEIR actions. So rather than being annoyed about your teammates strategy; make sure you adjust YOURS accordingly and play defensive in mid. If you lose players; don't be greedy and just rotate to salvage.

4 mid is NOT the superior strategy; there is always one team with a weaker teamfight; and in general the meta is to play 3 nodes. Playing 2 nodes is something which should only be done if you're very heavy teamfight focussed. Imo both in EU and in NA you can carry quite hard by playing conquest rather than playing mid node.

Most players who whine about people going far rather than 4 mid 1 home are players who don't grasp rotations themselves. I'd say out of 250 ranger games of me going far; I got flamed in at least 30%. (My name was pretty memesy and I did announce i was going far; so that's on me.) Often before even starting the game.

Good players can adapt their stategy; rather than being stuck to a single one. Even at 1700+ rating, it's not rare to have FB + scourge be the only ones going mid. At that point we will just hide out of LoS and spectate mid until we know where at least 3 players are. The biggest mistake is people walking into mid as if they're rambo while they're outnumbered (or worse; when the enemy is in stealth or appears to not be there).

@Etheri.5406 said:Good players can adapt their stategy; rather than being stuck to a single one. Even at 1700+ rating, it's not rare to have FB + scourge be the only ones going mid. At that point we will just hide out of LoS and spectate mid until we know where at least 3 players are. The biggest mistake is people walking into mid as if they're rambo while they're outnumbered (or worse; when the enemy is in stealth or appears to not be there).

Well is not fun repeating myself I am talking about mid-low tiers.

Then what you describe is generic. Let's say 'the 3 people' are 2 scourges with a firebrand and the opponents are a guard, a thief, a warrior and a mesmer. What should they do when their team mate decides to go far? Even worse when he doesn't say a word and split at the last moment towards far? Would the '3 people' be able to escape the death?

There are no fixed, good or bad, starting splits. It's all about evaluating the team comps, the map and making the right decisions. When you play a build that you think it 'should go far' as you write it's like forcing your team into a 1-3-1 split, ignoring all the above which is absolutely wrong. And in the case you had evaluate that the fight wouldn't be in your favor by splitting 1-3-1 it's you that should be adapting, changing build or class to better suit your team needs.

There has to be a good reasongo far for a start. Often it is the team comp that is incapable of winning and holding mid. However, if you are sure you can take on a 2v1 at far then often it works out well. If enemy does not commit to a 2v1 then it becomes pointless.Mostly I come across players who want to go far every game. That's just lack of experience or overconfidence.

@Falan.1839 said:The problem in lower tiers is that people never play careful in mid. They will just run on the node and get oneshot even if you can already see the coreguards putting their warning signs up. 1-3-1 and 1-4 are both viable splits and it usually depends on the comp what you should do. If the enemy has Fb/Scourge and you neither have that nor enough burst to bring the FB down quickly (bursting the nec is pretty much obsolete due to mercy signet) it wouldn't be wise to commit 4 people to a teamfight you're most likely going to lose.

What’s even better is in Low Tiers people will constantly target the Necro over the firebrand too, and also love to refuse to change strat from taking mid to, play sides/out rotate.

@rest of thread, in Solo Que 1-4 is almost always what happens, but I personally am a huge fan of 1-3-1 because I feel like it’s a little safer as long as everyone is playing intelligently, and can give you a huge pay off if you manage to win the mid and far fight.

I'm personnaly not a huge fan of being the one going far in solo queue, because i will have no impact on other points. People need to consider the match on mid might be 3v4, so they have to play carefully and start leaving it if one is going down.

To be fair, 1-4 is probably the best at average rating if you tell others to instantly leave the point if one of your team downs while opponents are all still above 75% health.

Many people don't know when to leave."Y U NO REZ ME!!!""And go down with you? No Thanks."