Tzee

Oh sorry I didn't mean attack you nor anything like that. To be honest I thought that all points make sense to at least be competent at the game mode. I just touched most of your points to put them into perspective and avoid any future disagreements, I'm so into Pvp that I know how bad it can turn when it comes to that specific game mode expectations (which explains the toxicity you can see more in pvp than any other game mode). 

Now about what I personally want... After 1 week doing them I'm more interested in them, even when I say gold I do them for the pvp, which I love. So if we have interest in running 1 or more stable teams I'm in, like I wouldn't think it twice because I already had a plan to be part of or  recruit a stable team for tourneys. And of course running them daily with random teams for the gold that's something I want to. But it doesn't mean there's an obligation to play them. I would ask and if there's interest that would be nice but if not, no problem. That's why I thought about the tourneys idea and Eisen started promoting it I asked him it to be 'unofficial'. 

Now that I saw how strong teams are in the monthly, they are gold+ strong with strategy so I don't see that casual pvpers can get any higher in monthly  tourneys so it would be either invest some time or simply just have fun and get the gold haha. I'm not saying they are better, I'm saying they are usually hardcore pvpers and know their class by investing so much time in the game mode. And this explains why you won't see metas often, metas are imo the easiest or fastest way to get high but in pvp at least metas are not the top necessarily. For example some website says certain duelist build is the meta because many more people reach higher rankings with the same build but this newbie with meta duelist build fights a veteran duelist playing a non meta build. Usually the veteran will beat 10 times that newbie before the newbie has a chance. And top pvpers play what they want because they are good at them through experience, they don't need  follow the trends which are usually the metas. 

BTW, Vaanss, or however it's spelled, played hammer warrior (not in the supposed meta) in the monthly and he was at far. When I was in 1v1 against him I gave him a good fight but that was only few seconds (seconds in pvp is not short haha) and their roamer doing the expected +1 both got me down and that's strategy. What I can also read about that is hammer warriors have a good CC chain, so their strat was to hold far and buying time for the roamer to arrive. Just food for thought when it comes to playing against top teams.

Regarding 'teams' I agree with what Princess said, and it would be a good starting point if there's interest for them and as I said I'm 100% game if that happens. 

Even though I would love to agree with you because how competitive I am and I really like the interest the community showed about tourneys, I would like to say some things to consider that can be problematic. I'm not against anything of what you said, it's more like about what you said, in my experience, there are some make or break situations that can arise if not handled well, and pvp is usually a hotter place than PvE because of the passion and egos. I mean... if you propose to make it serious and competitive.

If we want to keep it for fun and gold farming, I'm ok with that too.

On 1/22/2022 at 7:06 PM, MarbleLion said:

But I think it's clear the best teams also do this to coordinate with their fellows beyond 'you support, me shoot'

When with my not-so-good english (which is not my mother language for those who don't know) I tried to talk about strats I often were ignored and I usually take it as if the non pvp players would consider pvp as 'you support, me shoot' but that's not really the case and in my long pvp expierence -  either in GW2 and other MMOs - it works same for example as a raid would, with a leader who knows the strats. And in pvp that's more problematic because not all matches are the same, it comes to the leader's ability to read the map to be able to switch strats. So if we don't go with a clear structure and strategy vs them who run strats and 1 of them calling the shots we won't have a chance. And I tell you because when I was younger I played for competitive teams like them. 

On 1/22/2022 at 7:06 PM, MarbleLion said:

In order to not crunch, that means 2-3 tourneys/week to get 100 QP's. 

In pvp the most important thing to learn to play a class better, to counter other classes and to absorb match information such as maps and best ways to rotate is when you play more. And if you propose to do it at least a little more serious the best way is to have defined teams that play together few times a week. If we keep changing teams and never playing defined teams we will hardly have tournament progression. In my case, if I'm part of a team and we play as practice twice a week i would still play the other 5 days with random teams for gold lol. In general I think that the more you play pvp the better you get... yeah if that was true lol... What I mean is that in this game the more you play more you learn about rotations, team play, map mechanics and timers.

On 1/22/2022 at 7:06 PM, MarbleLion said:

Additionally, I think we should try to split those teams into skill levels - either individually or in team play.  I'm not sure if we'll really need to for February, but people newer to PvP (like myself) may fall behind others

And this is really complex. How would you do it? We don't have a safe way to measure skill levels. If more of us did ranked we could say "1 supp, 1 roamer, 2 teamfighters and 1 duelist from gold.." But not many people play ranked and even ranked in this game is a joke. For example I enter low plat then get dropped to gold 3 then i have a really bad losing streak and I'm in high silver then an amazing winning streak and I'm gold 2. That happens all the time and I know other pvpers in the guild have experienced exactly the same. And I don't even know what my rank is. So because of lack of players on the leaderboard ranking can make it impossible to determine skill levels. Dueling cannot be a skill level measurement either, since we look for different roles which  are: Support (obvious we all know what supp do even in pvp), teamfighters or dps ( AoE damage or cleave, or snipers), roamers (+1 in any fight, decap ) or duelists (actually cap sides and stall them ). I mean we can't put them against each other and it would be unfair. Defining a skill level in a guild like ours is kind of unfair. I guess it would make more sense to make teams depending on how much time they want to invest in pvp/tourneys and the roles they feel stronger or more comfortable with.

I'm interested in all tourneys if i'm available, usually the  4pm, 7pm and 10pm (EST) are the best times for me unless it's raid time lol.

Personally I want to try for it and I was already considering it but I only have 35 QPs so I was thinking about doing daily tourneys to be ready for it. 

Instead of leaving people out of groups I would plan beforehand with the members that are willing to participate.

/sign