WvWvW Tactics and Organization
Posted 22 January 2011 - 07:19 AM
WvWvW pits three servers against each other, and is (to the best of my knowledge) casual, drop-in PvP.
I want to propose a tactic in this setting that is conducive to large scale group tactics against similar large group tactics of other worlds.
Borrowing from Charr warbands, I'd like to create battalions/platoons/synonym for the purpose of swift and efficient wide spread domination of single players/small groups and rapid gain/conquering of territory.
Ideally, this would be set up in a guild or "waiting room" before entering the WvWvW map, and would be set up in the following way:
Groups of 10-20 experienced (or willing to learn) players, with a clear goal and direction, and a well-versed leader.
A set of 3-6 of these groups under a single commander (guild leader) that coordinates and changes plans on the fly based on situation or pressure coming from other worlds.
For example, warband A (WB:A) has a priority of capturing and securing trading post A (TP:A) in server 3's territory. This balanced group (class diverse, role fluid*) of 12-15 travels quickly to TP:A and finds a large group of server 3 troops stationed there. WB:A's leader sends a quick PM (ideally talking through a headset) to the guild leader, who redirects WB:B from their current directive to TP:A to assist. Therefore, WB:A outnumbers and out organizes server 3's troops and is able to capture TP:A quickly and efficiently.
*role fluid meaning able to switch to support, CC, and damage whenever necessary to assist those around to, and to synergize your abilities with those of teammates.
Obviously, this requires two things.
1) Leadership skills including experience and ability to think on the fly (not only with the WB leaders but also each individual)
2a) Interest in WvWvW itself to get the numbers required to be powerful like this.
2b) An alternative to guilds to organize players into groups larger than 5 with concise leadership and goal-oriented strategy.
2b seems unlikely, as guilds tend to have better, if any at all, sense of togetherness needed to follow directions toward a common goal.
I'm assuming that guilds will do this. Partly because, if they don't, the guilds that are (mine :p) will decimate them.
This decimation is kind of a double edged sword. If WvWvW is too competitive, it will drive individuals who haven't dipped their feet in away, keeping with the same exclusivity that I'm sure upper level Structured PvP will already have.
The nice side of the sword is, competition generates retaliation. If servers began truly competing and taking pride in their server dominating that week, warbands may become tight knit, and the game could be taken to a whle new strategic level.
I desire this kind of PvP more than anything. The idea of high organization, high stakes, and observable affect in your own warband makes me a bit giddy, I must say.
But, it requires more than tactics, that's the easy part. It requires a culture conducive to accepting willing newcomers to your world and teaching them the ways of conquest.
I want WvWvW to be competitive, and not just casual. What say you?
Posted 22 January 2011 - 07:21 AM
It will eventually just turn into a big zergfest at one key area on the map, or even worse...a WAIT fest (both sides too scared to rush in and make the first move)
Posted 22 January 2011 - 07:24 AM
Tactics need to evolve to be successful.
Posted 22 January 2011 - 07:37 AM
Malchior Devenholm said:
Yeah, I've seen those so-called "Mexican standoffs" (something tells me the term might be disparaging :zip:) in 8v8 games. Though they seem more likely in the small group range - the larger and more disorganised each side gets, the more likely someone will "Leeroy" in and start things off.
Posted 22 January 2011 - 08:00 AM
- Usually (my experience in WoW BG's like AB/WSG) people don't care about what someone is telling to them. Mostly because of the way those leaders are telling them what to do. "nub go there!", or just they don't want to be ordered around by some stranger on the interwebz even if it would give them benefits in the end.
- This planning works best if you know the players already beforehand, aka a given guild or lots of RL-friends.
- You mentioned that elitism perhaps would come in, but people couldn't really restrict who joins the given WvWvW.
- There are lots of people out there who plays to have fun and teaching others is considered by them mostly frustration and annoyance. (I dare to say that everyone who tried to teach newbies had some facepalm moments at least once already)
Posted 22 January 2011 - 08:20 AM
lower level people could farm resources and drive siege weapons while higher levels would form into 2 teams 1 attacking team, and 1 defense team tying to keep the other guild from capturing towers.
Some guilds would have over 70 people playing at any time, and i noticed that even if it was 20 vs 70 it was always the team that were better organized that won 90% of the time. Because they could focus down small groups at a time, and did not face one large group.
I would like to see something like this, where who ever has the best leaders will win the majority of the time, and not just due to blind luck.
Posted 22 January 2011 - 08:23 AM
Posted 22 January 2011 - 08:40 AM
Posted 22 January 2011 - 08:41 AM
Then things like size of the battlefield and scoring become the factor.
I don't see even the most dedicated GW players scheduling their weeks around fort sitting.
And then depending on the number of forts and the size of guilds, it would take inter-guild cooperation to hold the entire map all week.
Also, the question of res shrines, or whatever. So you and your entire guild are laying siege to a fort far from your res shrine and then you die.
Too many unknowns in my opinion. As of right now WvWvW in my opinion is a wild frontier where death awaits around every corner and hiding in every bush.
Posted 22 January 2011 - 08:55 AM
What i hope to see is something along sieges from Lineage 2, but taking place in the whole Mists and being a week long. And yeah, while it featured lots of zergfest and waitfest, a skilled, well-balanced party of nine could easily wreak a lot of havoc, be it on attacking of defending side.
Posted 22 January 2011 - 09:18 AM
Posted 22 January 2011 - 10:43 AM
But seriously, while such effort into concentration and tactics would be admirable, it would just turn into a big Zergfest later on
Posted 22 January 2011 - 10:45 AM
Posted 22 January 2011 - 10:46 AM
i think a system such as thought up by the starter of this thread would take a lot of time to set up and manage, and that the pro's would probably not make up for that.
im thinking a small team (10 to 15 or something) of people that know each other and have contact over VoIP could cause some serious damage :D
Posted 22 January 2011 - 11:22 AM
comming from WAR the first few weeks where chaotic as hell. but then ppl slowely started to realize who did know what they where talking about and who didnt.
this aint gonna be like a WoW bg where you'll get a different moron yelling at wtf you need to do. (maybe vanilla when you where still only fighting with and against ppl from your own server)
you'll get the same ppl yelling at you. and after some time the ppl that have no clue what there yelling about will be burned out and only the ppl who care will keep leading.
atleast i hope.
any1 know what benefits your server will get for holding parts of the mists?
Edited by SearinoxTokoyami, 22 January 2011 - 11:35 AM.
Posted 22 January 2011 - 11:28 AM
Posted 22 January 2011 - 11:35 AM
To add, the need for zerg in some games is due to the fact you actually lose something when you die. You zerg in Aion because you fear losing abyss points, you zerg in other games because death may result in you losing a piece of gear, etc. So hopefully since we won't have any lame penalties, zergs will be at a minimum.
Edited by baels, 22 January 2011 - 12:34 PM.
Posted 22 January 2011 - 11:37 AM
Exactly, basically what he said.
You can't be sure of the map or the amount of people in one given place, you say 3-6 groups of 10-20 people thats 120 people to control maximum to start....now with WorldvsWorldvsWorld, where a world could hold up to thousands, and maybe 500-1000 will be playing at a given time? its hard to predict numbers and strategies when be have no idea what to base them on
Posted 22 January 2011 - 03:38 PM
got a link to that guide?
Posted 22 January 2011 - 03:49 PM
Posted 22 January 2011 - 04:00 PM
I'm advocating for organization in a macroscopic form that allows for large groups of people to coordinate and therefore dominate, encouraging and requiring other servers/guilds to do the same to stay competitive.
This organization could come in the form of small, covert 5-6 man operations working in tandem with larger scale operations.
For example: 3 necromancers, 1 warrior, 1 ranger. Necromancers take advantage of positioning and fear and balance people in the middle of a ring, while using minions to provide steady DPS and rigor mortis to help CC. Warrior does melee damage, bringing down the target, and ranger with an offhand dagger performs some more CC.
Small set-ups and tactics like this (not too completely thought-out, just something I came up with right now) enable small groups to quickly devastate single players or groups of 2-3 unorganized players.
But, I, for one, would like to see large scale movement of troops towards an objective.
Posted 22 January 2011 - 04:04 PM
Posted 22 January 2011 - 04:06 PM
Isn't this the point of WvWvW? To fight in large scale battles?
Posted 22 January 2011 - 04:08 PM
Posted 22 January 2011 - 04:53 PM
A guild or a group of friends can always organize inside the battle, along with complete strangers that want to help out. That's the beauty of WvW. :)
Posted 22 January 2011 - 05:01 PM
Herd mentality also plays a role.
But in the end, it is viable strategy, and like any strategy, it has its own pros and cons.
Posted 22 January 2011 - 05:26 PM
just give em a little bait and 5 ppl will wonder off, then 10, 20 till the full zerg is off route *grin*
Posted 22 January 2011 - 05:35 PM
just give em a little bait and 5 ppl will wonder off, then 10, 20 till the full zerg is off route *grin*
Or make a group of 5 people who stay behind the zerg, and follow them while recapturing what they took. Send the rest of the party to cap all the other stuff which are not controlled yet.