Doubleteaming : how to fix it

[TheGrimm.5624]

So lets go theory crafting. First off lets assume we keep the three sided fight concept because I can't see them doing away with that and it would be a rewrite. In the design you would think that blue & red would double team green, but that's not a great way to do it since you potentially doom anyone that is green. So if the goal is to dynamically shift as the match goes on then we need a mechanic that shifts as we go on so that we can both handle match setting versus skirmish period setting versus score resets. Given the smallest element is 5 mins, lets run with that. So if you want population/score balance to matter than maybe we go with a method that warscore is not even when killing players. So players in the top skirmish score in that 5 mins are worth 1.25, players in second place are worth 1 and players in the third are worth .75. Now I pull these numbers as a simple way to display the concept and numbers can vary. But the goal would be to pay more for kills against whoever is leading at the time to try and discourage people just jumping the side on the bottom. It would pay more to jump the side in the lead and allow for catchup mechanics. Again to keep things in balance this would only apply to PPK. Holding and keeping for PPT should remain the same but I think the PPK would still encourage weaker sides to attack stronger vs just 1 & 2 attacking 3, or it would at least pay #3 more for each kill they did get while double teamed. Just quick thoughts but something to consider if the goal is to encourage weaker vs stronger sides.

[enkidu.5937]

now imagine 2 organized alliance raids double-teaming the third team that only has randoms online 😆😆😆

[Aeolus.3615]

2 hours ago, enkidu.5937 said:

now imagine 2 organized alliance raids double-teaming the third team that only has randoms online 😆😆😆

That will happen and if it happens working as intended, it is not much diferent from 2 servers only atack the smaller server.

Edited September 7, 2022 by Aeolus.3615

[AlCapwnd.7834]

11 hours ago, enkidu.5937 said:

now imagine 2 organized alliance raids double-teaming the third team that only has randoms online 😆😆😆

That most likely would not happen. As alliances will have multiple tags on multiple maps to defend multiple objections at the same time. At least that is the way i see it going. Alliances will also have guilds that want to FIGHT. And Fighting for an objective will be fun with 2-3 guilds that want to fight AND take the objective.

[Svarty.8019]

On 9/6/2022 at 3:32 PM, Strider Pj.2193 said:

The ONLY way to remove double teaming is to have just two sides.  And that is a whole different game mode.  It no longer is WvW.

 

Wvwvw was designed to encourage double teaming.  The BIGGEST issue isn’t that double teaming happens, it’s WHO is double teamed.

 

There needs to be incentives to double team the leader.  Reward structure, etc.  

 

 

I proposed this donkey's years ago. Seems Arenanet isn't interested in doing anything useful to the mode. 

Edited September 7, 2022 by Svarty.8019

[Strider Pj.2193]

8 minutes ago, Svarty.8019 said:

I proposed this donkey's years ago. Seems Arenanet isn't interested in doing anything useful to the mode. 

The two sides?  Or incentivizing attacking the leader.  

[SweetPotato.7456]

Hello-OooOooOoooOooOOoOo ???? 

Double team a server is not a problem, don't fix what is not broken.  

that said. 

 

It is very wise to hit someone when they are busy defending/fighting elsewhere. 

This is not a problem to be fix. It is how /ability you read the map, make wise decision and be kind to your scouts.

[manu.7539]

10 hours ago, SweetPotato.7456 said:

Hello-OooOooOoooOooOOoOo ???? 

Double team a server is not a problem, don't fix what is not broken.  

that said. 

 

It is very wise to hit someone when they are busy defending/fighting elsewhere. 

This is not a problem to be fix. It is how /ability you read the map, make wise decision and be kind to your scouts.

Well, the ability to read the map doesnt change anything when 2 map Q attack your bl and focus on your team and objectives. Its nearly impossible to defend yourself from it no matter how good is your team. When it happen too often then your team can be the best you'll still not win at the end of the week. Its obviously a wrong/broken mechanic in a competitive game and I try  to see with u guys if there is some solutions to fix that.. not that I have any big expectations that arenanet will fix it haha

[displayname.8315]

Best way to avoid player vs player interactions is not to wait for a fight and go PPT, that's small think.. best is to go back to Tyria and do your world rotations.  Big profit massive brain I win GW2

[Strider Pj.2193]

2 hours ago, manu.7539 said:

Well, the ability to read the map doesnt change anything when 2 map Q attack your bl and focus on your team and objectives. Its nearly impossible to defend yourself from it no matter how good is your team. When it happen too often then your team can be the best you'll still not win at the end of the week. Its obviously a wrong/broken mechanic in a competitive game and I try  to see with u guys if there is some solutions to fix that.. not that I have any big expectations that arenanet will fix it haha

Wait..  It’s your Border you are upset that they are ‘double teaming?  Really? 
 

I can see you being a little put out in EbG..  But your home border????

 

Sorry Manu..  That is the WHOLE purpose of a home border.  Defending from both other sides…

[manu.7539]

2 hours ago, Strider Pj.2193 said:

Wait..  It’s your Border you are upset that they are ‘double teaming?  Really? 
 

I can see you being a little put out in EbG..  But your home border????

 

Sorry Manu..  That is the WHOLE purpose of a home border.  Defending from both other sides…

ok ok, it was just an example, dblteaming can happen in ebg too, we all know it. U are misreading or something. I'm talking about the fact that sometimes one particular team is much more dblteamed than the others. In my opinion the best team should win at the end of the week no matter how much the others are dblteaming them. I'm just looking for solutions to make sure the best win, thats all.

[Zyreva.1078]

Winning WvW matches was never about "the best" and that won't change ever, double teaming or not.

[manu.7539]

6 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

Winning WvW matches was never about "the best" and that won't change ever, double teaming or not.

With this kind of philosophy humanity would still think that the earth is flat! Not because somethings ever been the way they are that they need to never change! 😛

Edited September 8, 2022 by manu.7539

[Strider Pj.2193]

18 minutes ago, manu.7539 said:

ok ok, it was just an example, dblteaming can happen in ebg too, we all know it. U are misreading or something. I'm talking about the fact that sometimes one particular team is much more dblteamed than the others. In my opinion the best team should win at the end of the week no matter how much the others are dblteaming them. I'm just looking for solutions to make sure the best win, thats all.

Currently the team with the most coverage throughout the 24 hr cycle will win if the give a young cat.  If you call that the ‘best’ then it happens now.

[Zyreva.1078]

43 minutes ago, manu.7539 said:

With this kind of philosophy humanity would still think that the earth is flat! Not because somethings ever been the way they are that they need to never change! 😛

I'm not the delusional one who believes the best team would win if only double teaming would get removed (which btw would be very easy to do by simply removing one contestant).

[manu.7539]

7 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

I'm not the delusional one who believes the best team would win if only double teaming would get removed (which btw would be very easy to do by simply removing one contestant).

I'm still looking for where I said such a thing??? I'm only looking to counter balance the effect of dblteaming on the warscore of a skirmish. What is it so bad about it that u need to be so aggressive? Its only a discussion! O.O

[Zyreva.1078]

1 hour ago, manu.7539 said:

I'm still looking for where I said such a thing???

First Post:

"Dblteaming can be very annoying and can decide which team win or not. The best team not always win at the end of the week because of it." And you keep repeating similar stuff, while dismissing every argument that is brought up against your suggestion.

1 hour ago, manu.7539 said:

 

I'm only looking to counter balance the effect of dblteaming on the warscore of a skirmish. What is it so bad about it that u need to be so aggressive? Its only a discussion! O.O

There is a reason we have 3 teams instead of only 2 like it would be, if the game mode would actually be competitive - it at least in theory alleviates the effects of uneven population, because the world with the highest population has to deal with 2 other's if they want to own the entirety of the maps, instead of simply roflstomping the same players over and over again. So in some way it makes the game fairer.

Edited September 8, 2022 by UmbraNoctis.1907

[Kate.3679]

On 9/6/2022 at 2:08 PM, AlCapwnd.7834 said:

The Double Teaming will stop when MAG stops being MAG.

 

Its your fault MAG. You created the issue you are complaining about.

 

As always, put your confused emojis over there --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------->

Who would team up with the most hated NA server? If anything, mag is mostly on the receiving end of the double team. Lmfao

[manu.7539]

34 minutes ago, UmbraNoctis.1907 said:

First Post:

"Dblteaming can be very annoying and can decide which team win or not. The best team not always win at the end of the week because of it." And you keep repeating similar stuff, while dismissing every argument that is brought up against your suggestion.

There is a reason we have 3 teams instead of only 2 like it would be, if the game mode would actually be competitive - it at least in theory alleviates the effects of uneven population, because the world with the highest population has to deal with 2 other's if they want to own the entirety of the maps, instead of simply roflstomping the same players over and over again. So in some way it makes the game fairer.

If you read carefully, I never asked to "remove" dblteaming, and never said that dblteaming was always decisive about who win or not but it happen. Never asked to remove a team too. It could be interesting but if I talk about dblteaming it necessary needs 3 teams to exist.

[SweetPotato.7456]

12 hours ago, manu.7539 said:

Well, the ability to read the map doesnt change anything when 2 map Q attack your bl and focus on your team and objectives. Its nearly impossible to defend yourself from it no matter how good is your team. When it happen too often then your team can be the best you'll still not win at the end of the week. Its obviously a wrong/broken mechanic in a competitive game and I try  to see with u guys if there is some solutions to fix that.. not that I have any big expectations that arenanet will fix it haha

If you cannot fight 2 fronts, how can you keep saying your team is good? We are heading toward alliance, if you still only depend on one team, you are way behind, need to find your ally fast. 

[manu.7539]

18 minutes ago, SweetPotato.7456 said:

If you cannot fight 2 fronts, how can you keep saying your team is good? We are heading toward alliance, if you still only depend on one team, you are way behind, need to find your ally fast. 

I can say my team is good but I didnt so far. Seems that misreading, is a real issue in this forum 😕   I wasnt talking of my team situation. It was just a taught I had after being dblteamed this week. Tanking and not dblteaming is stopping us to reach T1 atm but thats another story.

I dont think I need to argue about the fact that its really tough and rare to resist to a decent dblteam, we all saw what happen, except you I guess.

[manu.7539]

4 hours ago, Ruru.1302 said:

Who would team up with the most hated NA server? If anything, mag is mostly on the receiving end of the double team. Lmfao

Yeah mag is maybe the exception. These guys are used to be dblteamed and do a really gj at it.

[Gorani.7205]

On 9/6/2022 at 5:12 PM, manu.7539 said:

It doesnt always happen this way, sometimes the worst team focus one of the other teams just to bully them, or to show that they still have some power over you or whatever the reason. Sometimes its good enough to ruin the chances to win for the best team.  Its unfair and for those enjoying a fair competition it is a demotivating situation to play that game when it happen too often.

lol...

Did you just accuse the "worst team" (whatever that is by your definition) to ruin the other two teams winning experience by actually fighting back? It sure reads that way to me.

[Justine.6351]

If I am roaming in ebg I generally roam on the side who has smc. You wouldn't believe the salt I can draw from the server currently "winning". If I get real obnoxious I start building trebs in camps to pound their t3 towers.

[Karagee.6830]

On 9/6/2022 at 4:54 PM, manu.7539 said:

you are right but lets agree that in this situation the dominating server is going to win the skirmish anyway, bonus or not.

Deso won EU last week because it was basically 1v1 against Gandara and they were outnumbering the opponents in off-peak hours (late night and morning). This week Piken comes up and they struggle to win skirmishes because Piken pummels them in the morning and Gandara the rest of the day. So they are headed to T2 looking hopeless, after winning the previous week. In T2 next week they will be massacred by GH+WSR.

The 3 server dynamics are important and a significant part of match strategy. I think Deso would beat Piken in a 1v1 match with the current teams and against Gandara it would come down who plays the most late at night, but they can certainly beat Gandara. However for them to win in a 3-way match with Gandara and Piken it would require one of the other servers to actually help them or they would come bottom most of the times (again, with the current teams which factor in linked servers).

Besides it's common sense, if you are on an enemy border and get a report team 2 is attacking the keep of team 3 on the other side of the map it's often natural to attack the keep or a T3 tower on your side of the map. Maybe even just contest the garrison to help team 3, if them taking the keep benefits you in terms of scoring. Most of these situations change in the course of the day and week and the teams with fewer people online often ride on the back on what the larger team is doing to gain an advantage on the 3rd team. Of course, you can also have situations where most servers hate one or two specific other servers (seems to be the situation in NA) so that might present some differences to this dynamic, but I think the linking system plays a role in softening that (as the linked servers don't have the same strong feelings as they get paired with many host servers).

Edited September 9, 2022 by Karagee.6830