The Cure For Roaming & Those Alike

[XenesisII.1540]

@MUDse.7623 said:however i do think kills in roaming could be awarded more, interms of PPK and especially loot. many also do not roam because the rewards are trash compared to blobbing, tho if you roam structure based you need to think alot more then those in comparison rather brainless blobs. for this i think any type of reward should not be based on participants but on the target and then divided by participants. for instance 1 kill = 25 heavy loot bags , kill that poor guy with 50 and only every 2nd will get a bag , kill him solo and you get em all.

Then no one is going to roam, cause giving out that many bags is insane even with diminishing returns. That would encourage even more gank groups to go around and kill anyone that's dumb enough to roam. I sure as hell ain't going to roam without being a one shot skill/combo class, or not at all cause why should those gankers be rewarded even more for playing a broken class in roaming? Hell might even encourage players to just trade kills for bags.

The proper way this should been done is 1 person = 1 bag, it doesn't matter how many others tagged, only 1 bag given to the highest damage or killing blow, a zerg would have to fight a zerg to get a proper amount of bags. Hell you could even make it more strict, you only get a bag for a finisher, the rest of you get a grey bone.

[bq pd.2148]

@XenesisII.1540 said:

@MUDse.7623 said:however i do think kills in roaming could be awarded more, interms of PPK and especially loot. many also do not roam because the rewards are trash compared to blobbing, tho if you roam structure based you need to think alot more then those in comparison rather brainless blobs. for this i think any type of reward should not be based on participants but on the target and then divided by participants. for instance 1 kill = 25 heavy loot bags , kill that poor guy with 50 and only every 2nd will get a bag , kill him solo and you get em all.

Then no one is going to roam, cause giving out that many bags is insane even with diminishing returns. That would encourage even more gank groups to go around and kill anyone that's dumb enough to roam. I sure as hell ain't going to roam without being a one shot skill/combo class, or not at all cause why should those gankers be rewarded even more for playing a broken class in roaming? Hell might even encourage players to just trade kills for bags.

The proper way this should been done is 1 person = 1 bag, it doesn't matter how many others tagged, only 1 bag given to the highest damage or killing blow, a zerg would have to fight a zerg to get a proper amount of bags. Hell you could even make it more strict, you only get a bag for a finisher, the rest of you get a grey bone.

the 25 bags was just an example based on the loot a player currently can generate if he gets stomped by a full blob. but yes giving only one bag allways would be pretty much the same.

and i dont see how it is efficient to form a gank group and share your bags if you can kill most opponents you encounter as a roamer within seconds anyway?

[Whiteout.1975]

@Dawdler.8521 said:

@"Whiteout.1975" said:The scenarios you give are currently subjective. As the radius has yet to be determined here. But Yes, It should be balanced in reason. As most limitations in general and regarding radius's, strive to be.

That would just open up a whole can of worms with what's a "good" range. If it's too short it's just gonna lead to zergs covering a larger area and if it's too long it's gonna grief everyone around the zerg. And trust me, it's

always

gonna be one or the other no matter the range. That's not the kind of gameplay or argument you want when just trying to enjoy the game.

The point is that debuffing

players

is the wrong kind of limitation. You want to debuff the other things instead - score, objective buffs, outnumbered, etc. For example an incredibly simple "debuff" against the zerg is... show them on the minimap. Not just the swords indicating where 25+ hit a single target, but instead just like armies kicking up dirt in their path, when there are too many close to each other their movement start to become apparent on the map. We've already automated most of the scouting, might as well take the full step. If people want to "hide" then run smaller groups. This would have zero chance to interfere with anything that roamers, havoc or even guild groups do. It simply shows zergs. And there you go, a debuff that doesnt punish individual players.

Good Reply buddy @Dawdler.8521 . I still would like it tested my self just to be sure. Just for the record, I'm not saying you are wrong ether though lol.I think Your Idea of showing a bigger group is neat too. I just mainly want roamers to feel like their at least rewarded and valued nearly as much as zergs. If we can all find a method that does that. Then Awesome. The Point of this Post is to do that. We need something to cushion the blow to the balance in this game. And finding an answer would help do that. Plus would make the game even better ultimately if balance ever does get fixed.

[Kiroshima.8497]

Just buffing/debuffing doesn't typically do it, it just means you have to stack super hard to compensate for the numbers nerf.

What you want to boost roaming is an increased number of Soft (non-walled or paper tier max) Objectives for roamers to hit. These soft objectives also need to lead into Keeps (and towers).

For example, nerf all the supply carried by yaks by 75% (10 per yak, 20 with packed yaks), multiply number of yaks for upgrade by 3 (60 for t1, 120 for t2, 240 for t3). Add 3 camps per keep tier objective (expand the map more, 1 feeds into the keep only, 1 for each corner tower). Place the camps in treb range of an outer keep wall.

Now there's more of everything that you NEED. Yaks carry less supply, which means there's less supply in hard objectives and more in camps. Zergs need to stock up by holding camps, but they can't hit all 5 camps without breaking up, rewarding roaming/splitting. If each camp is in range of a keep wall, roamers can more easily harass Hard Objectives from a camp, since now they aren't ferrying supply with limited numbers. This also forces defenders to exit the keep to fight back, since they won't have as much siege to emergency deploy (yaks are worth less on delivery, you need lots of yaks from all the camps to stock up).

Also, make it so that the more camps that you own that feed into a Keep grant you bonus rewards to everyone in the camp and the keep, for offense and defense. The more camps you hold while the main zerg breaks in lets you cash out more, which helps roamers get some of that keep loot without directly having to deal with zerg on zerg combat.

[XenesisII.1540]

@MUDse.7623 said:

@XenesisII.1540 said:

@MUDse.7623 said:however i do think kills in roaming could be awarded more, interms of PPK and especially loot. many also do not roam because the rewards are trash compared to blobbing, tho if you roam structure based you need to think alot more then those in comparison rather brainless blobs. for this i think any type of reward should not be based on participants but on the target and then divided by participants. for instance 1 kill = 25 heavy loot bags , kill that poor guy with 50 and only every 2nd will get a bag , kill him solo and you get em all.

Then no one is going to roam, cause giving out that many bags is insane even with diminishing returns. That would encourage even more gank groups to go around and kill anyone that's dumb enough to roam. I sure as hell ain't going to roam without being a one shot skill/combo class, or not at all cause why should those gankers be rewarded even more for playing a broken class in roaming? Hell might even encourage players to just trade kills for bags.

The proper way this should been done is 1 person = 1 bag, it doesn't matter how many others tagged, only 1 bag given to the highest damage or killing blow, a zerg would have to fight a zerg to get a proper amount of bags. Hell you could even make it more strict, you only get a bag for a finisher, the rest of you get a grey bone.

the 25 bags was just an example based on the loot a player currently can generate if he gets stomped by a full blob. but yes giving only one bag allways would be pretty much the same.

and i dont see how it is efficient to form a gank group and share your bags if you can kill most opponents you encounter as a roamer within seconds anyway?

Because a one shot roamer with a buddy especially a boon feeding buddy will have an advantage over just a one shot roamer. With the amount of bags you can get, even if your example was generous in that scenario, sharing half isn't a problem. In any case giving away a zergs worth of rewards on one kill is not appropriate.

[bq pd.2148]

@XenesisII.1540 said:

@MUDse.7623 said:

@XenesisII.1540 said:

@MUDse.7623 said:however i do think kills in roaming could be awarded more, interms of PPK and especially loot. many also do not roam because the rewards are trash compared to blobbing, tho if you roam structure based you need to think alot more then those in comparison rather brainless blobs. for this i think any type of reward should not be based on participants but on the target and then divided by participants. for instance 1 kill = 25 heavy loot bags , kill that poor guy with 50 and only every 2nd will get a bag , kill him solo and you get em all.

Then no one is going to roam, cause giving out that many bags is insane even with diminishing returns. That would encourage even more gank groups to go around and kill anyone that's dumb enough to roam. I sure as hell ain't going to roam without being a one shot skill/combo class, or not at all cause why should those gankers be rewarded even more for playing a broken class in roaming? Hell might even encourage players to just trade kills for bags.

The proper way this should been done is 1 person = 1 bag, it doesn't matter how many others tagged, only 1 bag given to the highest damage or killing blow, a zerg would have to fight a zerg to get a proper amount of bags. Hell you could even make it more strict, you only get a bag for a finisher, the rest of you get a grey bone.

the 25 bags was just an example based on the loot a player currently can generate if he gets stomped by a full blob. but yes giving only one bag allways would be pretty much the same.

and i dont see how it is efficient to form a gank group and share your bags if you can kill most opponents you encounter as a roamer within seconds anyway?

Because a one shot roamer with a buddy especially a boon feeding buddy will have an advantage over just a one shot roamer. With the amount of bags you can get, even if your example was generous in that scenario, sharing half isn't a problem. In any case giving away a zergs worth of rewards on one kill is not appropriate.

the way a little gank squad can chase solo roamers, same a blob could chase small scale groups would be nearly the same.however a roamer will more often run into a quickbag that is just doing daily etc then a zerg is destroying another zerg. thats why i said the scaling doesnt have to be linear.currently you will get alot more loot in a zerg. so the loot should be more the less people involved in the killing, how much more would be fair i dont know. probably anet could get better numbers if they log fight scales and their frequence.you seem very afraid that increasing loot for roamers will encourage more oneshot builds. anything that will draw more people to roaming will increase the amount of oneshot builds as they are highly efficient in roaming. you dont waste much time and often are prepared to get away. as long as there are small scale groups chasing solo roamers, solo roamers will run often run such hit and run builds. because with power creep random button smashing got very powerful so fighting 1 vs X, even against noobs is very risky without many target breaks + high burst/oneshots.but those are 2 different points, rewards for roaming are important to get more people into roaming. while ganksquads and oneshot builds are a consequence of roaming groups and balance changes. first of all i think we need more people roaming again, adressing ganking is IMO not as important as it is part of the mode. it is just not efficient to waste too much time to fight so outnumbering or oneshotting if possible will allways be done.some roamers want 'fair' fights to show/compare their 'skill' wich is oke, but for that they can do duels like they have been since ever. WvW mode is in theory about earning the highest amount of Victory Points, not about being the highest skilled 1 vs 1 killer. i personally also like a good fight, but i wouldnt ask the game to balance around it, that would be a completely other mode.

[joneirikb.7506]

Example: Make a buff/effect that passively increase movement speed by how many friendly players are around you.

• 20+ no bonus
• 10-19 +25%
• 5-9 +33%
• 1-4 +40%

Some people will be lured by just wanting to move faster, but on the whole, it allows small groups to outrun large groups. Also allows some players to avoid building in speed boosts into build for some more options, but it can be denied by grouping up.

---

Dimishing Returns: This one is never going t fly because of ANet carebear rule. But here it goes:

Reward WXP, loot, participation etc as a total number X, and divide it among every player participating. So if you solo capture a camp you get all of it by yourself, if you take it with 20 players, you get 1/20 of each.

Will strongly encourage players splitting up. Will also make some people feel very strongly about shouting others off so they don't cut their rewards in half (see ANet carebear rule).

Probably better with slightly less severe numbers, like reduce with 25% per person, instead of by 50%.

---

Similarly have PPK be affected by a multiplier based on how outnumbered you are locally. 20vs5, if you're in the 5 and get 1 kill, get 4 PPK. If the 20 kill 1 of the 5, reward them 0.25 of a PPK.

---

honestly, remove loot from npc's, encourage fighting players, not npc's.

[kash.9213]

I don't have a category though, I float around the maps bringing supply and jump into whatever's going on along the way. I'd be in and out of those ranges and modifiers too much I think and would just nerf myself.

[Whiteout.1975]

I Hope everyone had a good Easter :) I'm gonna go through the Main points or Goals rather that I've been noticing so far.

To start off, Point 1 & 2...1.) Based on the response's so far. I think we can all agree that roaming or small group play isn't as rewarding vs larger group play like zerging. Really it just comes down to the fight's for roamer's and when the fun is had, (if there is fun lol) there is nothing really keeping us in WvW.

2.) The game ether need's to have a way of Recognizing small group play vs large group play And/OR Strongly Encouraging small group play. So that Roamer's and alike can be/feel rewarded and valued appropriately.

...And it just really comes down to those 2 point's. (Point 1 will be easier to achieve after point 2 is acheived)I'll continue commenting as I have the time.

[Turk.5460]

@"DeceiverX.8361" said:Is it bad I've never heard of OP's guild?

No. I've never heard of them either. From the way OP talks though, I sincerely doubt his claim of being hailed as "the best."

[Hexinx.1872]

@joneirikb.7506 said:

Similarly have PPK be affected by a multiplier based on how outnumbered you are locally. 20vs5, if you're in the 5 and get 1 kill, get 4 PPK. If the 20 kill 1 of the 5, reward them 0.25 of a PPK.

---

I like this idea. Even if the 20 kill all 5, it amounts to 1.25 ppk, while if the 5 kill at least 1 it's a win for them. You can adjust the numbers accordingly but overall I like the idea.

[Whiteout.1975]

@Kiroshima.8497 said:Just buffing/debuffing doesn't typically do it, it just means you have to stack super hard to compensate for the numbers nerf.

What you want to boost roaming is an increased number of Soft (non-walled or paper tier max) Objectives for roamers to hit. These soft objectives also need to lead into Keeps (and towers).

For example, nerf all the supply carried by yaks by 75% (10 per yak, 20 with packed yaks), multiply number of yaks for upgrade by 3 (60 for t1, 120 for t2, 240 for t3). Add 3 camps per keep tier objective (expand the map more, 1 feeds into the keep only, 1 for each corner tower). Place the camps in treb range of an outer keep wall.

Now there's more of everything that you NEED. Yaks carry less supply, which means there's less supply in hard objectives and more in camps. Zergs need to stock up by holding camps, but they can't hit all 5 camps without breaking up, rewarding roaming/splitting. If each camp is in range of a keep wall, roamers can more easily harass Hard Objectives from a camp, since now they aren't ferrying supply with limited numbers. This also forces defenders to exit the keep to fight back, since they won't have as much siege to emergency deploy (yaks are worth less on delivery, you need lots of yaks from all the camps to stock up).

Also, make it so that the more camps that you own that feed into a Keep grant you bonus rewards to everyone in the camp and the keep, for offense and defense. The more camps you hold while the main zerg breaks in lets you cash out more, which helps roamers get some of that keep loot without directly having to deal with zerg on zerg combat.

This is a neat Idea, thanks for trying to help. I get the thought process overall. However, there is a few issues I can see initially though.1.) This may create too much pressure for roamers to go after the Camps as opposed to directly fighting other players. If they want to make an impact on their world in that regard. So they will likely be spending more of their time going after NPC's vs player's for this cause.2.) If You control a camp, (just speaking from experience) it's likely that the enemy won't try to fight you in it unless they outman you. If they do otherwise, they will probably fail. Especially when you are in a camp that you own. Which would likely cause a zerg size group or maybe havoc size group (Depending on your numbers) to pull off of their current objective to attempt wipe you in the camp. Which can be crippling for them because now they feel like they got to give up a bigger objective for a smaller one. Especially because there will be a greater need for supply. So this method may end up hurting bigger groups.

@Kiroshima.8497 said: Also, make it so that the more camps that you own that feed into a Keep grant you bonus rewards to everyone in the camp and the keep, for offense and defense. The more camps you hold while the main zerg breaks in lets you cash out more, which helps roamers get some of that keep loot without directly having to deal with zerg on zerg combat.

I'm a little confused on this one, sorry. Are you saying basically, the more camps that your side own's. The greater the reward You, as a Roamer and/or Zerg player will be receiving based on simply assaulting or defending some keep? Even if you are not present for the assault as a Roamer? If so, then I think that would just make it more rewarding for Zerg players than it already currently is.

[Swagger.1459]

@Whiteout.1975 said:I Hope everyone had a good Easter :) I'm gonna go through the Main points or Goals rather that I've been noticing so far.

To start off, Point 1 & 2...1.) Based on the response's so far. I think we can all agree that roaming or small group play isn't as rewarding vs larger group play like zerging. Really it just comes down to the fight's for roamer's and when the fun is had, (if there is fun lol) there is nothing really keeping us in WvW.

2.) The game ether need's to have a way of Recognizing small group play vs large group play And/OR Strongly Encouraging small group play. So that Roamer's and alike can be/feel rewarded and valued appropriately.

...And it just really comes down to those 2 point's. (Point 1 will be easier to achieve after point 2 is acheived)I'll continue commenting as I have the time.

There is not any reason to needlessly complicate the system, for little to no gain. Let's look deeper than niggling with numbers!

@"Swagger.1459" said:I understand your good intentions, but I’m sorry, I don’t see any realistic suggestions to improve or encourage more solo and small group play.

There are some ways to make solo and small groups more enjoyable and impactful, so let’s explore a couple of those...

-Profession, weapon and slot skill improvements, with solo and small group play in mind, so all professions have multiple working roaming builds.Most of us know what makes for a successful roaming build, so more viable options will encourage more roaming play.

-The dev team needs to make more maps with open area (not structures) objectives and events... This will create a need for players to break up into smaller groups to capture objectives and score points for your side...

The above two suggestions combined make solo or small group roaming more attractive and needed.

Edit- And let’s make some comparisons so I can explain the 2nd point more...

https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/File:World_versus_World_map.jpg

GW2- 4 maps, mostly structure based. Peak times zergs are map hopping and mowing things down. Solo players and small groups can contribute, but don’t necessarily have a game changing impact compared to zerg play. Running the same maps over and over is boring, and the devs know this because pve gets a ton of new maps... with more maps to come.

Versus...

http://camelotunchained.com/v3/bsc-design-docs/rvr-map/

CU- Bunch of unique maps, and RvR dungeon, that will absolutely require solo and small groups to help your side be successful...

You are very welcome!

[Whiteout.1975]

@Turk.5460 said:

@"DeceiverX.8361" said:Is it bad I've never heard of OP's guild?

No. I've never heard of them either. From the way OP talks though, I sincerely doubt his claim of being hailed as "the best."

Sorry, We were called the best. By players whom had known us during the time of 2017 on BG. Which is why I put "of its time". Though it's 2018 now. I'm sure someone else carries that title, as we aren't as active anymore. We are not so active because, it's just not as fun as it used to be, especially in roaming. Because of the balance... I'll just make YouTube vids in the future for us lol... But none of that even matters... I didn't make the post about The guild. I made it in regards to where I come from as a Player in GW2... Nothing more, Nothing less. Though I appreciate the fascination some people have over it vs everything else that was written lol.The post was based upon my feelings as a player. Also, based on where I come from and simply me trying to help out the game by offering an Idea/Method on how to do so. Now if anyone else wants to try help out the game by giving their Input in regards to the actual topic. I got nothing but respect for you.

[Kiroshima.8497]

@Whiteout.1975 said:

This is a neat Idea, thanks for trying to help. I get the thought process overall. However, there is a few issues I can see initially though.1.) This may create too much pressure for roamers to go after the Camps as opposed to directly fighting other players. If they want to make an impact on their world in that regard. So they will likely be spending more of their time going after NPC's vs player's for this cause.2.) If You control a camp, (just speaking from experience) it's likely that the enemy won't try to fight you in it unless they outman you. If they do otherwise, they will probably fail. Especially when you are in a camp that you own. Which would likely cause a zerg size group or maybe havoc size group (Depending on your numbers) to pull off of their current objective to attempt wipe you in the camp. Which can be crippling for them because now they feel like they got to give up a bigger objective for a smaller one. Especially because there will be a greater need for supply. So this method may end up hurting bigger groups.

@Kiroshima.8497 said: Also, make it so that the more camps that you own that feed into a Keep grant you bonus rewards to everyone in the camp and the keep, for offense and defense. The more camps you hold while the main zerg breaks in lets you cash out more, which helps roamers get some of that keep loot without directly having to deal with zerg on zerg combat.

I'm a little confused on this one, sorry. Are you saying basically, the more camps that your side own's. The greater the reward You, as a Roamer and/or Zerg player will be receiving based on simply assaulting or defending some keep? Even if you are not present for the assault as a Roamer? If so, then I think that would just make it more rewarding for Zerg players than it already currently is.

The thing is, playing at the macro level SHOULD force players to engage each other at small scale. WvW should be more like an RTS where resource management (aka supply/yaks) and proper deployment of troops (aka players) is what matters.

First off, making structures more difficult to upgrade helps soften them up on reset.

You also then upgrade the number of camps feeding into each keep, say 5 camps per keep (just spitballing a number here, but 2 is the current). Each camp should be within treb range of an Outer Wall (not inner, true zerg fights are for inner).Each yak is worth LESS supply, meaning that structures themselves have less supply in them, while camps are where you stock up. Defenders need to get yaks in to get more PPT, which means they have to RISK more PPK by going out and holding more camps.

Upgrading a keep with 1 camp now could take 2.5x as long as it does now. But if you spread out and hold all 5 camps, and walk yaks from them, you now upgrade pretty quick.

Sieging a keep would be pretty tough with the supply from 4 enemy camps, cause the defenders could siphon from each camp. If the offensive zerg splits and contests each, they are able to supply themselves even more than before, while forcing the enemy to split to reclaim their resources.

But, because players are REWARDS driven, and not just objective driven, you need an incentive to hold more camps. Thus you grant bonus rewards to those contesting the camps that siphon into a contested keep, for both offense and defense. The more camps you hold when it flips or the defense missions ends, the more you get (even if it's just like 1 heavy loot bag per camp for a flip, weaker rewards for defense since they trigger often).

Pretty complicated though, but I'm the guy who wants siege to cost supply to use (except oil/rams/golems), waypoints for defeated players on camps (no map hopping, you have to be killed by a player), the ability to stand in for NPC's (you become veteran supervisor, with some buffs but can't leave the camp ring, you get bonus rewards for yaks and defeating players), and other crazy stuff.

[b k.1648]

This doesn't actually seem to accomplish anything.

I don't need the game to call me a roamer before I can play like a roamer, and having a higher PPK multiplier doesn't make that role easier, harder, more fun, less fun, or anything really.

[Whiteout.1975]

@"Ben K.6238" said:This doesn't actually seem to accomplish anything.

I don't need the game to call me a roamer before I can play like a roamer, and having a higher PPK multiplier doesn't make that role easier, harder, more fun, less fun, or anything really.

The purpose is not so the game just calls you a roamer, x,y, or z for the fun of it and go "You're a Roamer now, Happy Birthday", end of story lol. The purpose is to define you and whom ever else so that you may be rewarded fairly for what you are actually doing based on your numbers. But the game can't do that very well if it can't have a way to tell the difference of who is who. PPK is one way, but giving credit to other's here... loot may be another way as well.If the game consider's you a Roamer, before you already plan on playing like a Roamer. I don't see the issue here. I mean people Roam solo or small group as in (1-5) anyways.The classification as to what you are is so the game can understand what you are. As well as you then understanding what the game consider's you to be.

Beside's that, there is good input and Idea's from other's beside's myself and their idea's involving how to help out roaming... You gotta Start somewhere if you want things to change...

[Whiteout.1975]

@joneirikb.7506 said:Similarly have PPK be affected by a multiplier based on how outnumbered you are locally. 20vs5, if you're in the 5 and get 1 kill, get 4 PPK. If the 20 kill 1 of the 5, reward them 0.25 of a PPK.honestly, remove loot from npc's, encourage fighting players, not npc's.

I really like these 2 idea's. I'm all for encouraging fighting players :)

[CrashTheGrey.1492]

Hello I'm Crash and people say I'm the best Solo Warrior Roamer of a specific time where there was probably like 3 other warriors on the map last tuesday or something.

That's just what they say though. Not me.

[Strider Pj.2193]

@CrashTheGrey.1492 said:Hello I'm Crash and people say I'm the best Solo Warrior Roamer of a specific time where there was probably like 3 other warriors on the map last tuesday or something.

That's just what they say though. Not me.

Huh, I figured you'd take something else away from this besides a 5 word small section of a post geared to prompt discussion.

Especially if you took the time to comment.

But of course, that would be constructive, and, well, you did say you are a warrior main.

[Oozo.7856]

I was definitely the best charr necro with white fur and a black mane with a name starting with the letter O... in my time. There might be better now, though.

[Honor.1982]

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@"DeceiverX.8361" said:Is it bad I've never heard of OP's guild?

No. I've never heard of them either. From the way OP talks though, I sincerely doubt his claim of being hailed as "the best."

Sorry, We were called the best. By players whom had known us during the time of 2017 on BG. Which is why I put "

of its time

". Though it's 2018 now. I'm sure someone else carries that title, as we aren't as active anymore. We are not so active because, it's just not as fun as it used to be, especially in roaming. Because of the balance... I'll just make YouTube vids in the future for us lol... But none of that even matters... I didn't make the post about The guild. I made it in regards to where I come from as a Player in GW2... Nothing more, Nothing less. Though I appreciate the fascination some people have over it vs everything else that was written lol.The post was based upon my feelings as a player. Also, based on where I come from and simply me trying to help out the game by offering an Idea/Method on how to do so. Now if anyone else wants to try help out the game by giving their Input in regards to the actual topic. I got nothing but respect for you.

2017 on BG? You mean a couple months ago? lol, all your server did was blob players down, I'm guessing you "dominated" redbl where the 3rd server in the t1 matchup didn't bother playing their bl.

[Justine.6351]

There is still small scale. You just got to learn how to make it on a seemingly dead map. Also helps to get off a t1 server.

[Whiteout.1975]

@Strider Pj.2193 said:

@CrashTheGrey.1492 said:Hello I'm Crash and people say I'm the best Solo Warrior Roamer of

a specific time where there was probably like 3 other warriors on the map last tuesday or something

.

That's just what they say though. Not me.

Huh, I figured you'd take something else away from this besides a 5 word small section of a post geared to prompt discussion.

Especially if you took the time to comment.

But of course, that would be constructive, and, well, you did say you are a warrior main.

Thanks Strider, Sadly only some understand the purpose behind that like yourself. I was not expecting it to cause so many Man-child Tantrums... but honestly if someone is going after that vs everything else that was written... It's just kinda pathetic really and I just LOL.

[Whiteout.1975]

@Honor.1982 said:

@Whiteout.1975 said:

@Turk.5460 said:

@"DeceiverX.8361" said:Is it bad I've never heard of OP's guild?

No. I've never heard of them either. From the way OP talks though, I sincerely doubt his claim of being hailed as "the best."

Sorry, We were called the best. By players whom had known us during the time of 2017 on BG. Which is why I put "

of its time

". Though it's 2018 now. I'm sure someone else carries that title, as we aren't as active anymore. We are not so active because, it's just not as fun as it used to be, especially in roaming. Because of the balance... I'll just make YouTube vids in the future for us lol... But none of that even matters... I didn't make the post about The guild. I made it in regards to where I come from as a Player in GW2... Nothing more, Nothing less. Though I appreciate the fascination some people have over it vs everything else that was written lol.The post was based upon my feelings as a player. Also, based on where I come from and simply me trying to help out the game by offering an Idea/Method on how to do so. Now if anyone else wants to try help out the game by giving their Input in regards to the actual topic. I got nothing but respect for you.

2017 on BG? You mean a couple months ago? lol, all your server did was blob players down, I'm guessing you "dominated" redbl where the 3rd server in the t1 matchup didn't bother playing their bl.

I'm just gonna reply to this cause I'm currently bored... We stopped being a thing (a guild) about Late October of 2017 I believe... We Joined BG before Server merging existed. Could not tell you the exact date there. Long story short, This is back When HoT was being hyped up for like a Year and people were getting bored so they stopped playing or transferred servers. We transferred because others transferred... The Game got to feel like a job on our current server CD... We wanted a place, at the time, where we didn't have to worry about numbers only for the sake of owning towers... It's so annoying to constantly come in the next day to see Towers, Keeps etc. mostly the other enemies color... That we worked so hard to get the previous day... So we Transferred... Same reason we left FC to come to CD before.

So if anyone thinks I hold some sort of server pride at this point, given that, your wrong. Not that I care if you believe me lol...Anyways some sad stuff went down in the old guild and I was asked to become leader by a few people and formed the New Guild, Death Circus. I and other's liked Roaming so that's what we structured the guild around mostly as a WvW guild. We as a guild overall, don't look to blob. We like to Roam and occasionally havoc. Which is why I made this post mostly in regards to roaming. In an effort to help that style of group play out and help balance it in regards to the other styles.

That being said, all I got left to say is this...

@Honor.1982 said:all your server did was blob players downThis is just lol... So? Guild does not = Server. Especially, when the guild is one who likes to Roam.