have BG ever been beaten before?

tell me a story

Yup , they have been lots of double teams but they keep bouncing back ,more determined than bandwagon servers

We could def beat them but why? T1 is terrible. It’s either fight 5v80 ktrains during OCX, 80v5 during NA prime time, or get double teamed constantly if you have a paper objective.

GVG Fights are non existent and roaming is mediocre. It’s just boring.

Back before the tower HP update, it was much worse. Once their structures hit T3...forget it....it would stay T3 for days and possibly the entire week because they have enough coverage to defend objectives without a guild group leading. If you were unfortunate to be double teamed and get papered, you were primed to get papered the entire week.

The sweet salt of tears.. ?

Hmmm...so it's kinda proven based on player's observations here...that BG would probably never have an Average Server Rank of 3 or above based on a 12 month moving period. If they did achieve it...they'd really have to tank pretty hard to make it happen.

That's really good to know...we could use this knowledge to create an in-game mechanic that can encourage Healthy Competition...instead of having to deal with the 800 pound Gorilla in the Room scenario that our current Match-Up design consistently creates.

Yours truly,Diku

Credibility requires critical insight & time.

This is what wvw has devolved into:Server X complains about BG, "how dare they stack and pvdoor everything with mega-bl;obs".Server X decides this is not fun and is unfair and devises a solution.Server X intentionally tanks to a lower tier (or transfers to a low tier link), so they can have "fair" fights where they are the mega-blob who pvdoors everything.

The key is there are huge servers and blobs in every tier. People hide out of T1 and make sure they don't have to face ANY other large, organized groups.And, they will transfer or tank if somehow they get stuck against other large, organized groups playing during their timezone.

Anet was right about one thing in regards to wvw, it's a PvE gamemode. Everyone keeps stacking, tanking, transferring so they can steamroll small groups or just pvdoor.No one is looking for "fights", just fast, easy loot and ranks.

@"Ubi.4136" said:This is what wvw has devolved into:Server X complains about BG, "how dare they stack and pvdoor everything with mega-bl;obs".Server X decides this is not fun and is unfair and devises a solution.Server X intentionally tanks to a lower tier (or transfers to a low tier link), so they can have "fair" fights where they are the mega-blob who pvdoors everything.

The key is there are huge servers and blobs in every tier. People hide out of T1 and make sure they don't have to face ANY other large, organized groups.And, they will transfer or tank if somehow they get stuck against other large, organized groups playing during their timezone.

Anet was right about one thing in regards to wvw, it's a PvE gamemode. Everyone keeps stacking, tanking, transferring so they can steamroll small groups or just pvdoor.No one is looking for "fights", just fast, easy loot and ranks.

Well not 'everyone'. There is a significant number of players who just log in and play, never transfer anywhere. It's where those small groups you talk about come from . . .

yes, a lot of times. :) jq/sos used to be the top.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:We could def beat them but why? T1 is terrible. It’s either fight 5v80 ktrains during OCX, 80v5 during NA prime time, or get double teamed constantly if you have a paper objective.

GVG Fights are non existent and roaming is mediocre. It’s just boring.

Back before the tower HP update, it was much worse. Once their structures hit T3...forget it....it would stay T3 for days and possibly the entire week because they have enough coverage to defend objectives without a guild group leading. If you were unfortunate to be double teamed and get papered, you were primed to get papered the entire week.

Hmm is is apparent you have not been in OCX for quite awhile unless it is the opposing stacked servers you mean 80 v 5 but oh well keep dreaming I guess its free.

@"Ubi.4136" said:This is what wvw has devolved into:Server X complains about BG, "how dare they stack and pvdoor everything with mega-bl;obs".Server X decides this is not fun and is unfair and devises a solution.Server X intentionally tanks to a lower tier (or transfers to a low tier link), so they can have "fair" fights where they are the mega-blob who pvdoors everything.

The key is there are huge servers and blobs in every tier. People hide out of T1 and make sure they don't have to face ANY other large, organized groups.And, they will transfer or tank if somehow they get stuck against other large, organized groups playing during their timezone.

Anet was right about one thing in regards to wvw, it's a PvE gamemode. Everyone keeps stacking, tanking, transferring so they can steamroll small groups or just pvdoor.No one is looking for "fights", just fast, easy loot and ranks.

please change that to 'wvw na'. Thanks.

@random.9803 said:

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:We could def beat them but why? T1 is terrible. It’s either fight 5v80 ktrains during OCX, 80v5 during NA prime time, or get double teamed constantly if you have a paper objective.

GVG Fights are non existent and roaming is mediocre. It’s just boring.

Back before the tower HP update, it was much worse. Once their structures hit T3...forget it....it would stay T3 for days and possibly the entire week because they have enough coverage to defend objectives without a guild group leading. If you were unfortunate to be double teamed and get papered, you were primed to get papered the entire week.

Common practice is that when you write X v Y, x is always the team that you are on and Y is always the opposing team. So when I say 5v80 it’s my team (5) verse the opposing team (80) which in this case is my server vs BG.

Likewise 80v5 is when my team has 80 and the opposing team has 5.

So read the post again with this in mind.

Still wondering where you came up with the fanciful 80 in OCX for the aforementioned server apart from stackable servers

Yes. They have won 152 times and lost 188 times. They also lost season 2. It's not the same server it was back in the glory days though.

@random.9803 said:Still wondering where you came up with the fanciful 80 in OCX for the aforementioned server apart from stackable servers

Are we saying that BG is not stacked? And that’s it’s not stacked in OCX?

To be fair BG is stacked in nearly every time zone, but BG’s guild groups will actively avoid NA prime time just so they can ppt without opposition from an opposing server with no OCX coverage

@"Ubi.4136" said:This is what wvw has devolved into:Server X complains about BG, "how dare they stack and pvdoor everything with mega-bl;obs".Server X decides this is not fun and is unfair and devises a solution.Server X intentionally tanks to a lower tier (or transfers to a low tier link), so they can have "fair" fights where they are the mega-blob who pvdoors everything.

The key is there are huge servers and blobs in every tier. People hide out of T1 and make sure they don't have to face ANY other large, organized groups.And, they will transfer or tank if somehow they get stuck against other large, organized groups playing during their timezone.

Anet was right about one thing in regards to wvw, it's a PvE gamemode. Everyone keeps stacking, tanking, transferring so they can steamroll small groups or just pvdoor.No one is looking for "fights", just fast, easy loot and ranks.

That's exactly it. Many (if not nearly all of them outside of BG), have no interest in fights or fair fights at that, just easy loot, ranks, bags, and maybe trying to inflate their way to ultimate dominator title. I can't begin to tell you how many squads i've been in on BG where they deliberately hid the tag and closed off the squads to remain somewhat smaller than the opposing force. The enemies would still go to a different map and jump on a pug group much smaller than them. By enemies, this was mainly these "fight" guilds that would consistently server hop.

This is why I would rather Anet shut down the bottom 2 tiers and disperse the players in the upper 2 tiers. Numbers would be even, though time zone coverage would still be questionable. There will be ques but it'd be no different than the que's we experienced in the first year of WvW's existence.

They've been beaten like a red-headed stepchild, at times to the point where they couldn't even play the borderlands. Years back, Mag had them confined to EotM.

The problem is that playing in the manner required to beat BG down and keep them down is exhausting for servers that lack the natural around-the-clock coverage BG has. Commanders and guilds burn out from such unfun gameplay.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

@random.9803 said:Still wondering where you came up with the fanciful 80 in OCX for the aforementioned server apart from stackable servers

This is basically correct.

but BG’s guild groups will actively avoid NA prime time just so they can ppt without opposition from an opposing server with no OCX coverage

but this? Where would you even imagine this?

So.. you are suggesting that BGs NA guilds hibernate until their off hours, where, now all of their t-3s would be gone because, you know, avoiding NA prime...

What sense would that even make for a server that prides itself in its PPT.

And, per the meme, is only in it to win?

Of course, it may be because they only have three NA guilds left playing.. But that would spoil the meme.

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

@"random.9803" said:Still wondering where you came up with the fanciful 80 in OCX for the aforementioned server apart from stackable servers

BG's current "NA Prime" is laughable. XvX runs invisible, and that leaves what...KiS to randomly run a pug raid once or twice a week to die on inc? Thankfully the nostalgic fear of BG's super PPT tactics keeps the enemy from knowing they could push down their junk with some shield gens.

Sadly. Hitting empty towers (even BG's) is boring in NA prime. Luckily BG's random off hour coverage keeps them in T1 because the few that play are willing to hit empty objectives. Or, more likely, the enemy's off hour coverage doesn't want to hit empty objectives.

D:

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

@random.9803 said:Still wondering where you came up with the fanciful 80 in OCX for the aforementioned server apart from stackable servers

Pffft

@"Ubi.4136" said:This is what wvw has devolved into:Server X complains about BG, "how dare they stack and pvdoor everything with mega-bl;obs".Server X decides this is not fun and is unfair and devises a solution.Server X intentionally tanks to a lower tier (or transfers to a low tier link), so they can have "fair" fights where they are the mega-blob who pvdoors everything.

The key is there are huge servers and blobs in every tier. People hide out of T1 and make sure they don't have to face ANY other large, organized groups.And, they will transfer or tank if somehow they get stuck against other large, organized groups playing during their timezone.

Anet was right about one thing in regards to wvw, it's a PvE gamemode. Everyone keeps stacking, tanking, transferring so they can steamroll small groups or just pvdoor.No one is looking for "fights", just fast, easy loot and ranks.

You assume people are hiding or tanking to T3 or 4 when the reality is they just don't have the PPT guilds and/or coverage. A guild raids maybe 2 hours out of a day, and most not every day. The reality is we have very, very little control over where we end up. I really doubt any server is even organized enough in 2019 to coordinate a server-wide tank.

@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said:

@random.9803 said:Still wondering where you came up with the fanciful 80 in OCX for the aforementioned server apart from stackable servers

lol, it is hard for BG to 'actively' avoid NA prime when there is hardly anyone 'active' on NA prime. There is a difference ya know :)

Beaten but not as in kicking them out of T1, AR curenty have highest kill ratio though i suspect this is because of SoS.

BG is just tanking a bit hoping that they get a link next matchup. Let's see if ANET is asleep at the wheel.

You guys really read into BG's motives too much.People just DONT CARE anymore. It is not strategy...Its ApathyIts like rats fighting over scraps

@Strider Pj.2193 said:The sweet salt of tears.. ?

Lol, typical comment from a BG player that helped kill the game, and drive most players away.

If you enjoy BG's place (in a deserted game) because of it's cheating ways then you are a part of the problem. And that is the crux of the problem with WvW as a whole. It encourages cheaters and bad players to believe they have skill, when all they have is coverage in a broken game mode designed by the inept.

If your server truly cared about WvW the players would leave BG instead of gaming the system to make the imbalances worse. But you don't and you won't.

If alliances ever are created (doubtful) then RvR players with skill may come back to the game. They left this garbage game years ago. Until then enjoy your empty 3 legged dog race.

Oh, and just a reminder to all. BG was a garbage server that nobody cared about for the first fiew years when the game was populated HoD for a few months and then JQ (for years) were the servers to beat. BG only started winning when they broke the transfer system and the game mode (with ANET's misguided help). But by that time most serious RvR players had already left the game.

BG never won with skill, only by gaming the system.