what if outnumbered created a real double team? — Guild Wars 2 Forums

what if outnumbered created a real double team?

Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭
edited September 10, 2019 in WvW

if two servers are outnumbered by another zerg server, then those two smaller servers are put on the same side and can't attack each other. if they have one anothers objectives, they get neutralized.

obviously outnumbered would have to be changed in such a way that it couldn't be manipulated - how to do that I don't know.

anyway just a thought.

edit
squad by squad basis makes more sense, sort of lol.

Comments

  • ArchonWing.9480ArchonWing.9480 Member ✭✭✭✭

    It isn't a bad idea but the winning side should also be ahead in score for multiple skirmishes and outnumber on all maps, not just one.

  • Swagger.1459Swagger.1459 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 1, 2019

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    if two servers are outnumbered by another zerg server, then those two smaller servers are put on the same side and can't attack each other. if they have one anothers objectives, they get neutralized.

    obviously outnumbered would have to be changed in such a way that it couldn't be manipulated - how to do that I don't know.

    anyway just a thought.

    ...

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    wow lol this is a horrible idea.

    WvW is a 3 sided match. Outnumbered servers do work together at times anyway, and that should be an option, not a forced design choice. And it defeats the purpose of tactical decision making and player autonomy the mode was built around.

  • @XenesisII.1540 said:
    snips

    yeah not a bad idea.

  • @ArchonWing.9480 said:
    It isn't a bad idea but the winning side should also be ahead in score for multiple skirmishes and outnumber on all maps, not just one.

    agreed.

  • @Swagger.1459 said:
    snips

    @Stand The Wall.6987 said:
    wow lol this is a horrible idea.

    so you are still salty about that.

  • UNOwen.7132UNOwen.7132 Member ✭✭✭

    Hm, no I dont think this works very well. For one you have the question of how you handle 2 servers trying to capture the same objective. Or what about the leading of the 2 outnumbered teams simply trying to grief the other team? Too many things that could go wrong.

  • Yasai.3549Yasai.3549 Member ✭✭✭

    Double team already works regardless of outnumbered or not.

    The two leading servers in the current match will always double team the weakest server.

    If I play a stupid build, I deserve to die.
    If I beat people on a stupid build, I deserve to get away with it.

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 2, 2019

    @UNOwen.7132 said:
    Hm, no I dont think this works very well. For one you have the question of how you handle 2 servers trying to capture the same objective. Or what about the leading of the 2 outnumbered teams simply trying to grief the other team? Too many things that could go wrong.

    hmm that would be a pickle.

  • Bigpapasmurf.5623Bigpapasmurf.5623 Member ✭✭✭✭

    While I like the concept itself, as a roamer that would cut the number of people I can get into a skirmish as well as "teaming up" should be optional instead of forced imo.

    Red = Dead...or someone runs away. Either way it's gone.
    twitch.tv/TRMC
    Lover of Jumping puzzles, Squirrels, WvW, and Taimi
    Co-Leader of SOmething inAPpropriate {SOAP}

  • Stand The Wall.6987Stand The Wall.6987 Member ✭✭✭✭
    edited September 10, 2019

    @Bigpapasmurf.5623 said:
    While I like the concept itself, as a roamer that would cut the number of people I can get into a skirmish as well as "teaming up" should be optional instead of forced imo.

    hmm maybe it could be a squad by squad basis.

  • shiri.4257shiri.4257 Member ✭✭✭✭

    that takes away half of fight guilds game play. we like to lurk on the server trying to take a t3 objective of the winning server. then pounce on them when they're not looking with stealth for glorious 1 push montages!

    Spectre [VII] - Wood League Champion. Making "fight guilds" stack on higher tiers since 2013.
    Michelin rated WvW guild since 2015. The gold standard. Never transferred, never reformed, adapting and reloading with or without Anet.

  • joneirikb.7506joneirikb.7506 Member ✭✭✭✭

    I'd prefer the idea of encouraging teams to fight the leading team by increasing rewards (points, participation, wxp, pips, whatever) to take on the leading team. And possibly reducing the same for fighting the losing team. Don't take away the choice.

    Elrik Noj (Norn Guardian, Kaineng [SIN][Owls])
    "Understanding is a three edged sword: your side, their side, and the truth." - J. Michael Straczynski
    "GW2 is a MSOFGG: Mass Singleplayer Online Fashion Grinding Game" -me

  • Straegen.2938Straegen.2938 Member ✭✭✭
    edited September 10, 2019

    Until they fix the rewards paper gives it will almost always be weakest server gets ganged up on. It is far more rewarding to cap a tower with no resistance in about 2 minutes than a T3 guarded by a populated server when both give exactly the same reward.

  • TheGrimm.5624TheGrimm.5624 Member ✭✭✭✭

    @joneirikb.7506 said:
    I'd prefer the idea of encouraging teams to fight the leading team by increasing rewards (points, participation, wxp, pips, whatever) to take on the leading team. And possibly reducing the same for fighting the losing team. Don't take away the choice.

    This ^^^^, make it more worth while to go after the big fish.

    Envy the Madman his musing when Death comes to make fools of us all.
    De Mortuis Nil Nisi Bonum.
    TheGrimm PoTBS/GW1/WAR/Rift/GW2/MWO/ESO/WoT/WoW/D2/HoTS/Civ6/CU/AoC

©2010–2018 ArenaNet, LLC. All rights reserved. Guild Wars, Guild Wars 2, Heart of Thorns, Guild Wars 2: Path of Fire, ArenaNet, NCSOFT, the Interlocking NC Logo, and all associated logos and designs are trademarks or registered trademarks of NCSOFT Corporation. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners.