Jump to content

  • Curse Sites
Help
* * * * * 2 votes

Yak's Bend vs Crystal Desert vs Tarnished Coast


  • Please log in to reply
48 replies to this topic

#31 Aetou

Aetou

    Sylvari Specialist

  • Members
  • 614 posts
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:32 PM

Actually the reason, or one of them, why YB borderland appears to have been remaining untouched is that it's actually very well defended.  I had a squad of about 15 there for a few hours (during EU Afternoon/early evening) yesterday and that wasn't enough to take anything more significant than camps.  We hit several towers but as they were all fully upgraded and mostly bristling with siege 15 wasn't enough to take them before reinforcements showed up (generally 20-30 strong.)  TC simply doesn't have the numbers during offpeak to keep our own Borderland, hold a third of EB when being pushed on two sides and then also mount a credible attack into a heavily fortified and well defended map too.  If I'd had 10 more people with me it would have been a very different situation, but as it was YBBL was locked up too tight to break with the forces TC had available.  CDBL, on the other hand, was a lot squishier and pretty badly defended so a similar sized force there was able to take a few towers and a keep and as the win isn't quite in the bag yet (and currently the score margin has our losing ranking points even though we are winning) we need every point we can get so aren't going to ignore CDBL to focus exclusively on Yak's even though when on maps where there are objectives held by both sides we definitely are going after Yak first (several times I've seen us push YB back to just their keep and 1-2 towers, while leaving CD to hold their third.)

#32 silavor

silavor

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 157 posts
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:49 PM

It's a similar case to what Aetou said during the NA day, as well. TC is constantly fighting on YB borderland, it's just very well guarded. Every time we manage to take a tower or a keep YB just pushes us back out within the hour.

#33 Omnirai

Omnirai

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 39 posts
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 13 November 2012 - 02:49 PM

Well, we just wiped YB off EBG over several hours largely leaving CD alone, right before CD's Asian prime time swept all our holdings both in our own BL and in EB.

I guess it's time to whine in the forums about mindless zergs and alliances! Oh wait, no it isn't.

#34 The_Tree_Branch

The_Tree_Branch

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 188 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 07:24 PM

View Postniaita, on 13 November 2012 - 01:06 PM, said:

meanwhile..


I have never seen YB occupy anything cept supply camps in TC BL, and likewise for TC in YB BL.

It's WvW, ppl target the "weaker" side for easy points. We all know that but why couldn't TC/YB just admit they have been doing it after Sat? It was supposed to be a great matchup, points were close to the hundreds even after 24hrs but all of a sudden, it's like TC/YB had some sort of agreement to keep out of each other's BL.

guess CD is that hated...

Because as soon as YB takes a tower in TC borderlands, there zerg comes back and takes it immediately. I was there 2-3 days ago with my guild, flipping camps in a big circle. Ninja'ed a tower or two, but it a) takes longer to flip, and B) is taken back quickly.

There is no collusion. TC and YB just seem to be able to hold their territory a little bit better than CD is. Whether its due to coordination, numbers, off-hour presence, it doesn't really matter.

#35 Lythenae

Lythenae

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 45 posts
  • Guild Tag:[AIM]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 13 November 2012 - 10:19 PM

View Postilr, on 13 November 2012 - 12:35 PM, said:

You guys know you can remove image tags from posts, right?  ... so the thread stays more readable?

The thread stays more readable, but the media is so comical that it's worth the second look.

Quote

Musta been really lonely considering there's no images anywhere of you holding anything noticeable. IE: your opinion doesn't refute this evidence and no one even knows who you are so you're not exactly coasting on reputation here.

Wow, you really got me there since your screenshots and video are such compelling evidence... Couple the total lack of any proof you have with the fact that your best counter is to accuse me of not being a board warrior and you remain just as laughably pathetic as you were at the start.

#36 ilr

ilr

    Golem Rider

  • Members
  • 2726 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 10:58 PM

Again, you just personally attack me and dismiss the evidence without discussing it first.  If you feel you have to violate the forum rules to make your case, then maybe there actually is something to this whole "board warrior" credibility.  Case in point:  you stated:

Quote

So you have a video showing one group seemingly defending their tower and then you run to another group attacking a completely separate tower... It would be one thing if your video showed those two forces meeting
The video showed quite clearly that there was almost no defense at YB's tower and that large TC force had to walk through that territory to setup and hold that point on the Ruins.  TC could have taken it with just Flame rams yet they ignored it while YB watched their back side (we tried and failed several times to come from behind to take that Treb out).  There were several other details you got wrong about the video(I made HD available). You just speculated on the situation as you've done with everything else you posted in this thread, and you got it wrong.

You, and other speculate that I'm posting this b/c I'm disappointed we're losing.  News Flash, everyone who cared about winning already left CD weeks ago.  No, I was furiously documenting this for the selfish reason of proving Arenanet's "game theories" fundamentally incorrect.  They stated that it would always be in every server's best interest to hold cease fires on the other 2nd/3rd rank server to weaken the biggest threat first.  But that's not what the rewards over-time equation supports.  ...apparently, not even when Servers go into it with a decent amount of respect for eachother.  ....Again, you personally attack me as having some other agenda here, but you can clearly see at the beginning of the thread that I was on your rose-tinted side and was really optimistic about this matchup.

But the evidence is piling up and my involvement in documenting has now been forced to come to an end.  I hope in time you also realize that this was a product of bad design, but I hope the final wake up call doesn't come in the form of WvW becoming a ghost town like so many of Anet's other failed PVP creations.  I also hope that you realize you can't attack someone else's credibility with just insults alone.

#37 Subtle

Subtle

    Fahrar Cub

  • New Members
  • 13 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 11:01 PM

In YBBL - we focus on taking our map - from whoever is on it.

In the other boarderlands - we take what we can get, defend what we got and strike where there is weakness - No matter who it is.

In EB - focus on our 1/3rd - And once we have it, take targets of opportunity. If you are weak on one side of the map because you are fighting on the other: we will take ur stuff.

There is no 'alliance' here, none of this working together crap - if you are red: you are dead.

#38 The_Tree_Branch

The_Tree_Branch

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 188 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 11:19 PM

View Postilr, on 13 November 2012 - 10:58 PM, said:

Again, you just personally attack me and dismiss the evidence without discussing it first.  If you feel you have to violate the forum rules to make your case, then maybe there actually is something to this whole "board warrior" credibility.  Case in point:  you stated:


The video showed quite clearly that there was almost no defense at YB's tower and that large TC force had to walk through that territory to setup and hold that point on the Ruins.  TC could have taken it with just Flame rams yet they ignored it while YB watched their back side (we tried and failed several times to come from behind to take that Treb out).  There were several other details you got wrong about the video(I made HD available). You just speculated on the situation as you've done with everything else you posted in this thread, and you got it wrong.

You, and other speculate that I'm posting this b/c I'm disappointed we're losing.  News Flash, everyone who cared about winning already left CD weeks ago.  No, I was furiously documenting this for the selfish reason of proving Arenanet's "game theories" fundamentally incorrect.  They stated that it would always be in every server's best interest to hold cease fires on the other 2nd/3rd rank server to weaken the biggest threat first.  But that's not what the rewards over-time equation supports.  ...apparently, not even when Servers go into it with a decent amount of respect for eachother.  ....Again, you personally attack me as having some other agenda here, but you can clearly see at the beginning of the thread that I was on your rose-tinted side and was really optimistic about this matchup.

But the evidence is piling up and my involvement in documenting has now been forced to come to an end.  I hope in time you also realize that this was a product of bad design, but I hope the final wake up call doesn't come in the form of WvW becoming a ghost town like so many of Anet's other failed PVP creations.  I also hope that you realize you can't attack someone else's credibility with just insults alone.

I really didn't see any personal attacks in that post. He just thinks you're full of it, and I tend to agree. You're showing a very slanted view of the battle on a borderland. You ask why TC isn't hitting us on our BL? Let me ask you, why is there no CD presence on our BL?

You ask why YB isn't fighting on TC borderland. Despite the fact that we have (selective screenshotting is so easy), let me ask you, what benefit would we have had from going there? YB doesn't have the wvw population to man all borderlands at all times. If we've got a foothold in another, why wouldn't we focus on entrenching ourselves there more rather than opening a new front?

I've not watched your video (I'm at work about to leave) of Yaks and TC presumably ignoring each other on your BL. Two responses to that. The first, is I would imagine servers go to another BL for a reason. Either easy points, or to draw a servers focus away from another front. Three nights ago, YB did not have our borderland locked down. We sent troops to another borderland to hopefully draw their attention away from our homeland (as we hope people there would get called back home). I would imagine other servers operate under a similar manner.

Secondly, if I actually frapsed my WvW fighting, I could show you hours of clips from YB attackig TC borderland 2 nights ago, and hours of clips of YB defending against TC AND CD on EB last night. If there was really a cross server alliance between us, don't you think that we'd be relatively neutral on EB?

Try seeing the battles from a different perspective. It's not just about hitting whatever moves, its about picking high impact targets with lower costs.

Sure, it sucks when it seems like a server is being double teamed, but we've had people on our side bitching about the same thing in chat. It's all about perspective.

#39 Cruyelo

Cruyelo

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 11:27 PM

1) There's no way we'd be able to control our players and get them to ignore targets like this.
2) What would TC gain from this, exactly? Last week TC finished 363 000 versus CD with 196 000.
Do you think TC needs an alliance? An alliance with YB would hurt TC more than anything else since it means TC has to share CD's points with someone else while being unable to take points from YB.
Makes no sense. TC would be starving itself.
3) To be honest, CD simply doesn't require an alliance to beat. Not at this moment, at least.
4) If there truly was an alliance, don't you think CD would be even lower in scores? If TC could lead by so many points alone, wouldn't CD be in an even worse situation when facing two servers working together?

Here's a counter theory : CD is good, but not good enough to finish in second place in Tier 3 anymore. They have the hardest time because they're currently outmatched in this particular matchup.

But really, it'd be impossible to somehow get players from both servers to somehow work in unison. There are nights where it's hard to get players from one server to work with each others.
Too many points don't align for your theory to hold up.

Edited by Cruyelo, 13 November 2012 - 11:28 PM.


#40 Karuna

Karuna

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 67 posts
  • Guild Tag:[ESP]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 13 November 2012 - 11:28 PM

Surprisingly, players from TC, CD, and YB all seem to be acting friendly towards each other in the EB jumping puzzle tonight.  So obviously, this means that the madness is spreading and now all three servers are being sneaky and coordinating a secret triumvirate-alliance together!  Wait . . wut . . ?

Edited by Karuna, 13 November 2012 - 11:29 PM.


#41 The_Tree_Branch

The_Tree_Branch

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 188 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 11:51 PM

So...I just got home from work, fire up WvW to look at the map, and guess what I see....


Posted Image

Within minutes of taking this screenshot, Pangloss on EB was flipped by CD. Seems like this should be enough to disprove any sort of collusion conspiracy theories of a YB/TC alliance vs. CD. As I said before, it's all perspective and timing.

#42 Bakedg00ds

Bakedg00ds

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 69 posts
  • Location:A grocery store near you

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:50 AM

Wait a second....alliance conspiracies are T1 territory.  T2 and T3 are coverage deniers.  T4 is zerg hate.  Wtf is going on here?!  Everything is getting turned sideways.

#43 Alodar

Alodar

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 25 posts
  • Guild Tag:[TSL]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 14 November 2012 - 12:57 AM

Any notion that TC and Yaks are working together is just someone making up an excuse to cover up what the true issue is... CD is not as good as the other two servers.

I've (Madember) been commanding TC forces for much of the fight on Yaks borderlands and our focus there has been against Yaks for about 90% of the time.  We RARELY go after CD, and I have in fact often purposely kept our forces away in an attempt to give CD a chance to get back onto the map and force Yaks into a multi-front war.  Every day I log in and we have nothing, and it's YAKS that we're beating off our starting zone to take back our tower and keep.  This has always been our focus.

Stop making up lame excuses for why you're losing and just BE BETTER.

Don't come in here with this garbage about Yaks and TC helping each other because you look like a fool.

And keep showing off your pictures of Yaks/TC not fighting... and I'll post pictures of the 3-5 Trebs that are invulnerable and can't be hit from below that Yaks has constantly bombarding our Keep from their Garrison to disprove you.

Yaks and TC have constantly been fighting against each other... even moreso than either of us have been fighting CD.  And why?  Because of the REAL reason you're in third place... you're NOT putting up a fight.  You're rolling over and spending more time on the forums making up BS excuses for your pathetic display on the battlefiend than you do actually fighting on the battlefield.

Edited by Alodar, 14 November 2012 - 12:58 AM.


#44 Lythenae

Lythenae

    Fahrar Cub

  • Members
  • 45 posts
  • Guild Tag:[AIM]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 14 November 2012 - 01:44 AM

ilr, you seem to have confused speculation with summary.  I summarized exactly what your video showed, which wasn't much of anything.  Let's break down your analysis.

View Postilr, on 13 November 2012 - 10:58 PM, said:

The video showed quite clearly that there was almost no defense at YB's tower and that large TC force had to walk through that territory to setup and hold that point on the Ruins.

This is completely false.  There are three exits from each spawn point which means both southern spawns can access the southernmost supply camp without passing a tower.  That large TC force could walk right there without ever seeing the Yaks people in the video regardless of where they spawned, but let's top it off by pointing out that you showed Bluebriar and Redlake which means the TC spawnpoint was to the north.  Why would they have to walk past Redlake to get to the ruins when they can just swim right to the ruins?

Quote

TC could have taken it with just Flame rams yet they ignored it while YB watched their back side (we tried and failed several times to come from behind to take that Treb out).

To continue the above, TC could have completely bypassed the tower but you CD folks weren't if you kept running into them on your way to the treb.  Given that your video shows YB killing a CD person right next  to the tower, it's clear you weren't bypassing the tower, so YB could have been defending against the CD there.  That brings me to my next question which is why were you running to Redlake when you were trying to take the treb out if you were spawning to the south west of the treb?

Quote

There were several other details you got wrong about the video(I made HD available). You just speculated on the situation as you've done with everything else you posted in this thread, and you got it wrong.

Another swing and a miss.  I didn't speculate on anything, I summarized what I saw without the wild assumptions you are making.  You showed a small force of Yaks killing some CD right next to their tower, then you ran to the TC emplacement and got roflstomped.  Period.  That's what happened.  Again, had your video showed those two forces meeting and then just passing by, you'd have some credible evidence.  Instead, you've got a whole bunch of nothing you want to try to spin into something.

Edit:  Added an image for convenience in understanding why your "evidence" is nonsense.  Thanks for the readily available screenshot.

Posted Image

Edited by Qhoryn, 14 November 2012 - 01:47 AM.


#45 Serim

Serim

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 146 posts
  • Guild Tag:[NAGA]
  • Server:Crystal Desert

Posted 14 November 2012 - 01:47 AM

Another way to explain what you are seeing on the CD BL is that there isn't a multi front fight on any other BL.  I know when I was flying solo, I enjoyed jumping into the multi-front regardless of who's BL it was just because it was more dynamic and you know there is a presence there.

It's not about being double teamed, but solely about fighting in a dynamic, fun environment.  This would partly be why our BL is constantly contested even at night when green and red bl are largely green and red.  You go where there is a presence, in order to have the most fun.  Not because YB and TC are trying to maximize point totals at the expense of CD.  I doubt there are any commanders out there that think this way when attacking objectives, mainly because you will lose the front to the other team.  And if they are thinking this way, they will clash over the same objective and both won't be able to take it.  The likelihood of a sustained truce is very poor.

#46 farkov47

farkov47

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 52 posts

Posted 14 November 2012 - 06:37 AM

It is very important to win at something. Anything. No matter how meaningless it seems.
An alliance isn't against the rules.

#47 The_Tree_Branch

The_Tree_Branch

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 188 posts

Posted 15 November 2012 - 07:03 AM

Was a fun fight in WvW tonight. /salute to TC defending SM. Had a blast. First time I've seen this many trebs erected for YB. I stopped checking when we got to 9.

Posted Image

Edited by The_Tree_Branch, 15 November 2012 - 07:03 AM.


#48 Louis8k8

Louis8k8

    Vanguard Scout

  • Members
  • 276 posts
  • Location:KW/Toronto
  • Guild Tag:[BS]
  • Server:Tarnished Coast

Posted 15 November 2012 - 12:46 PM

WTF those trebs xD

Nice screen.

#49 Zheo

Zheo

    Asuran Acolyte

  • Members
  • 140 posts
  • Location:The Great White North
  • Guild Tag:[SQDN]
  • Server:Borlis Pass

Posted 20 November 2012 - 03:43 PM

The reality of any supposed 'alliance' is if YOU were the one in the alliance crushing the third world, you would a) deny it's existence and B) not complain at all, because you were on the winning team.  For anyone complaining about worlds being in alliance, give it a rest, because you would take advantage of a ceasefire/alliance with another world if it benefitted your world.  

It's a game, people. If two world unite and take over, you can head to one of the other boards and take the fight to them that way, OR you could change your strategy, and instead of trying to fight a united front of a large fighting force, break into squads and make guerrila strikes.  There is more than one way to be successful in WvW, so stop whining about it.

I myself was in DB on YBBL last night defending against an attack from FA on the north gate and TC on the south gate. The YB team didnt complain about getting hit on both sides, we just kept fighting and sent out strike teams to flank them.  Don't get mad, play smarter.

Edited by Zheo, 20 November 2012 - 03:44 PM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users