Stahlhagel wrote:@vomi
you are wrong, do you think DG has no SG?

btw. SG means high RR, Teamspeak and tactially trained groups.
PUG: no rank, no teamspeak, no common tactics, no planning, different languages -> no chance.

RR: I often see KT or DG or Hexagone running with some members arround 4-5L. SGs should have all the group 9L or more and the same 8 people, like Anguish did.

Teamspeak: Not all the guild use TS (KT doesn't) and even pugs can use it (I've been in decent pugs using it).

Tactially Trained Groups: Wat? Daoc is a mmorpg, the least you can do playing in rvr is knowing your role in it. I know a lot of bad players playing in your so called "SGs", wich indeed are just guild groups with some people with high RR.

So,

The idea: In RvR there are a lot of High RRtards 8men hardcore gank tactically trained groups

The facts: In RvR there are people playing in guild groups, some of them focused on RvR mainly indeed and they have some experience with it. These guilds have pretty much different players/ways of playing so fighting a pug might be harder/easier, but again this emain is only for SGs is a myth.

vomi wrote:... but again this emain is only for SGs is a myth.

Agreed,it's for stealthers too.

in the Non-prime time i also had fun with some nice PuG´s..

set was:
cleric
minne
scout
friar
minne

or an other:
minne
wizzard
scout
friar
cleric

we used TS since all were german...are we a SG because of that? those 5 ppl were from 4 guilds^^ but i have to admit we were kinda good RR (rr 6-8 )
we even succeeded against guildgroups of 5..but also we lost...all in all i guess all had fun (even the enemy since they won some fights too). some battles were around 10 minutes..

we are the Randgruppen-gruppe^^ (classes noone like to play here..)

imo SG are the same player no matter what rr etc.

rr is caused by steady playing together

Everything else with mixed people is PUG.

Ofc there are bad pugs and good pugs

so 8 different players with rr7+ in ts are a sg ?
lol'd

Kaltess wrote:Try the hib looser's method, take it a 2.00am

yeah american's playing at their prime time are such loooooooosers

well... dg had a sg, but the setup changed too often to call it a real sg.

But it was in theory a planned set group of 8 players. By nowadays we barely manage to get the 8 people together even once a week.

And my definition of a set group is just the same 8 players playing togehter on a regular basis. RR doesn't matter, Voicecom doesn't matter for this definition.

Alb is overpowered since i play this Game(beta) , so no wonder

karayemis wrote:Alb is overpowered since i play this Game(beta) , so no wonder

You played few then, cause mids when no Cc inmunity was implemented could kill a zerg with the area stun and some casters over and over ^^

Stahlhagel wrote:@vomi
you are wrong, do you think DG has no SG?

btw. SG means high RR, Teamspeak and tactially trained groups.
PUG: no rank, no teamspeak, no common tactics, no planning, different languages -> no chance.

you make it sound like ppl went to some trainning camp to become SG members.
SG = Set group right?
This would mean pretty much the same players every night or maybe 10 tops, who are use to playing together and know what to do.
What we have on uthgard is more guild groups, which is a bunch (closer to 20) of ppl who are all on the same level of skill (more or less), like to play with each other and have fun.
These groups are on average ofc better then the standard pug especially if you claim pugs are all RR1 clickers without any sense of teamplay.
With abit of effort, some basic tactics and abit of luck i have seen pugs being able to compete with atleast most the GGs out there.

Also i see no reason not to try and even the odds when you are up against a good GG. Try and bringing a couple more.. The problem is that alot of ppl always bring another FG and thus not making the odds even but alot in favor of the 2fgs, which will lead to the GG quitting alot of the time.
Ofc this also means that GGs should embrace the challenge of killing large groups then 8 and not just quit as soon as the see a 10slot.

with the rather small amount of RvR active ppl on uthgard its kinda hard to get a perfect balance and you sometimes gotta try and see it from your enemys point of view to get good and fun action.

Mids took 2 relics today at primetime :p

vomi wrote:RR: I often see KT or DG or Hexagone running with some members arround 4-5L. SGs should have all the group 9L or more and the same 8 people, like Anguish did.

Closest thing Anguish had to a set-group was when playing on alb,
but even then there were more than 8 people playing the 9 characters they had there.

It mainly was guildgroups, but compared to other guilds, they had a very limited playerpool (usually around 12-14 people).
So it did happen that the same people played with eachother much.
Many people also played some of the characters in group aswell,
it was not always the same person on any given character.


I am not sure I have come across a group that justify your definition of SG so far. (well gdrw had one group that was pretty close, when we had agramon)
Most here just seem to be guildgroups, and there is a reason for it.
To be able to maintain a SG of only 8 people over a long period of time, and to play regulary, is simply impossible!


NB. Anguish did never run a pure guildgroup of only r9+ people
(now stop spreading lies )

running a "set group" is the same as getting 8 people together to work the same job.


you better like the work!

Liss wrote:

vomi wrote:RR: I often see KT or DG or Hexagone running with some members arround 4-5L. SGs should have all the group 9L or more and the same 8 people, like Anguish did.

Closest thing Anguish had to a set-group was when playing on alb,
but even then there were more than 8 people playing the 9 characters they had there.

It mainly was guildgroups, but compared to other guilds, they had a very limited playerpool (usually around 12-14 people).
So it did happen that the same people played with eachother much.
Many people also played some of the characters in group aswell,
it was not always the same person on any given character.


I am not sure I have come across a group that justify your definition of SG so far. (well gdrw had one group that was pretty close, when we had agramon)
Most here just seem to be guildgroups, and there is a reason for it.
To be able to maintain a SG of only 8 people over a long period of time, and to play regulary, is simply impossible!


NB. Anguish did never run a pure guildgroup of only r9+ people
(now stop spreading lies )

When I faced Anguish playing Mid I've always seen the same 8 characters, all of them pretty high RR: that's why I said they looked like a SG from the outside, or at least the guild group I've met so far that is close to the idea of a SG.

Yeah, I'm wrong, they never run a guild group of only r9+ people, tho as I said I remember em playing with only high RR (Nobody under rr7? It has been a long time since Anguish stopped).

Cheers dude