To all the flames on primal datacenter...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kinseykinz

snip

---

Oh my bad, never knew Exodus was apart of the primal server. So apparently your Rank 40 something on the Adders side, fascinating. I'm rank 50 on Flames and just transferred to Maelstrom. Why? Because Flames literally suck (this time around).

When we win, its because either Adders and Mael decided, "Hey, lets beat the crap out of each other and completely ignore other nodes and Flames!", which is exactly what happened when I reached rank 50 (5% chance of that ever happening). The other matches, well they went something like this:

A. When you get 2 nodes on your side and the 2 GCs literally sandwich you till there's nothing left and literally part ways. I'm dead serious.

B. When we're not winning, somehow we're still being targetted by Adders and Maelstrom even if we're below 100, literally using us as point fodder.

C. 1 GC against us could be attacking (we may win the brawl or not) while the other literally relaxes watching as we get out teeth kicked in. The last time that actually happened is to my favor (for once) when I won my 3rd time this week after 30+ matches and I reached Rank 50. (last words was: "I'm outties")

Btw, I'm not saying Adders and Mael are always against us, but this is the life of a Primal Flames PvPer. We're targets for points. Like NPCs literally wandering around until someone on our alliance comes in with friends and gives orders, that is if they would even bother listening after so many unsuccessful matches. Sometimes even if we play smart by just guarding and attacking properly, somehow either Adders or Maelstrom would go at it and feed the hell out of the other team easily giving them 200 points while we just hold the nodes we have. Then someone speaks up and says "Destroy the winning side!"

We go in and somehow get double teamed in the end by both teams. My speculations would be that:

1. losing team wants to push 2nd and the 1st place team wants to keeps us away.
2. losing team hates our guts from the last rounds and don't want us to win.
3. Infamously the ol' double teaming conspiracy

All is likely but the 3rd one, but one can never be sure with these horrible losses lately. Some guy told me he had 21 wins, 24 2nd, 27 3rd wins this week. I was friggen baffled and of course I think he was lying to spite me. So anyway, its my luck alone that gives me a 10% win ratio on the Flames side, my GC just sucks, or Flames have some sort of chicken fodder aura that draws in Maelstrom and Adders like crows to ripe fruit. Either way, its BS. There's no denying that. And grats to those with amazing scores on the Flames Primal server because I don't see it happening :/

I know last night people in Flames/Adders were fed up with Mael winning all day, so there was a sentiment to just zerg Mael in one match, which Flames won in a route, like 800-200-20. It was worth it.

I've been in all 3 GCs now on Primal Cluster, and Adders have the absolute worst win rate since Seize was introduced. Flames, when they're on point, are very consistent and I had a winning weekly record with them. But they too easily get tunnel vision and get caught up in meaningless fights that a GC (Maelstrom...) can exploit, so lots of 2nd place finishes where a lead was blown. Maelstrom is the overall the strongest GC, it looks like they've gotten better since I've been away. The seem to win the most overall. They think strategically and give themselves the best chance to win. Usually they only lose when too many players are not on the same page (reset day filled with Eso cappers), RNG really screws them over, or a gamble by another GC (Flames) pays off for once and beats out the by-the-numbers approach of Maelstrom.

Anyway, once I get my 100 wins with Badders I'm back to Maelstronk to finish hitting rank 50. I might go back to Flames and hit 50 with them, too (and be with my CuC bretheren), but unless they add a new mount requiring it, I'm never going back to the Badders.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurogaea

So anyway, its my luck alone that gives me a 10% win ratio on the Flames side, my GC just sucks, or Flames have some sort of chicken fodder aura that draws in Maelstrom and Adders like crows to ripe fruit. Either way, its BS. There's no denying that. And grats to those with amazing scores on the Flames Primal server because I don't see it happening :/

---

It really comes down to leadership; a gc is more likely to win if there is at least one person doing call outs. Not trying to brag, but my win ratio is usually 40-50% every week with an average of 30 matches. And its because I can get a majority of the people in my alliance to actually do sensible things. My suggestion is to try to make call outs yourself. Study the map more every match and you'll notice patterns of what does and doesn't work. You'll be able to tell when a pincer is coming or when to back off. Trust me, most people will listen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by C00KIE_M0N57R

Trust me, most people will listen.

---

Most people do listen; however, sometimes it takes a bit of nagging to get them all to pay attention. often, people just get too caught up in the fight to notice the chat box, and, there's always the "bad apples" in the group.

I find I spend a lot of time fighting against cowards and pacifists who are constantly shouting "RETREAT!!" in the chat box, or insist on camping nodes under the pretense of "defense," even when it is an awful decision and will clearly cost us the match. For example, people who insist on defending even though they are in last place. You will never gain enough points just sitting there, but somehow they are afraid to attack and take new nodes. Stupidity at its finest, unless your goal is 2nd or 3rd place. You also get the occasional person who is convinced you're going to lose even before the fight has started. It's mind numbing, and infuriating, and it can literally infect the entire Alliance and effect their performance if all they hear is negativity about their odds of winning... There's a lot of negative voices to outshout in the chat box sometimes.

You're right though. Winning requires strong leadership. Every man for himself does not work. For anyone who has a bad winning %, I'd recommend paying attention to the chat box and honestly evaluate if there is clear and solid leadership or if there's just a lot of negative comments. If it's the later, consider trying to lead yourself (if you have a mind for tactics) or finding someone else who can do the job (if you don't personally have a mind for tactics). Just be aware that if you take up the role yourself, it requires that you take a certain distance from the fight.

I have to pull myself out early from combat a lot of the time to check the map, node spawn timers (focus targeting a node is a good trick for doing this), and enemy positions, so that I can accurately plan the teams next move. Then I have to make my decision clear to the team in a simple to understand manner and make sure they listen (which sometimes requires multiple shout-outs). It also requires good map awareness, and knowing which direction is the best to approach from. Most people charge in head first because it's the shortest path, but that's usually leads to a stalemate or putting yourself in a position to get pincer-ed easily. Sometimes it's better to take the long way round, which means convincing the team to not get too far ahead of themselves. You gotta be quick in your instructions. Because of this, I spend a lot less time being directly involved in the fights than the grunts when leadership falls to me. Some people might find that not nearly as fun, especially since it comes with a lot of responsibility, but someone has to do it if you want to win.

Btw, here's something to give you an idea about the victory rates and differences of the GCs PvP stats on the Primal servers. Maelstrom has more wins, Adders have less wins (more than Flames), but have a better win ratio than Flames, and Flames have more matches (they get in more often) so they Rank Up pretty fast.

http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodest...hly/?sort=rate

I also noticed something as soon as I switched GC's (Maelstrom). The queue times are HORRENDOUS. I now see why people complain about that crap, and I kind of see the point of calling the df for frontlines flawed. Even if you queued and 100 before you also queued, your still going to be waiting for a 72 man fight, just because there's multiple players on your GC queuing at the same time. It assumes more players are just going to join and leaves you waiting for Flames and Adders to pop in (Mostly Flames).

Going to say this now, Flames have a reaaaallly bad reputation. So bad that most (to my perspective) have moved to either Adders and Maelstrom which is why Flames have so many matches. Maelstrom and Adders are constantly waiting for them to start up the df. My guess is maybe 300 on maelstrom, 250 on Adders, and 75 on Flames, I dunno.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurogaea

http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodest...hly/?sort=rate

---

If this is supposed to prove anything... it doesn't.

The fact is that the loadstone standings are there for personal stats. There is no way to filter results to find out how many matches were won in total for your GC. All it does is show you the top ranked players, or the most prolific players, and how they rank against one another in a list of 100 depending on victories, win rate, or number of matches played.... that really doesn't say much about how the 3 GC's compare to each other.

If you wanted, you could try to compile your own list by counting the individual stats of the players from each GC and than average them for comparison, but that would still give you a wildly skewed result, because the pool being sampled is not even close to being equal or comparable.

For example: this week, on my server, with a sample pool of 93 players in the Victory rate tab, Mael had a total of 75 players represented with a average victory rate of 66.5%. Adders had 3 players represented with an average victory rate of 53%, and Flames had 15 players represented with an average victory rate of 46%. Based just on the victory rate alone, Mael wins the most with the highest average. However, notice that they took up 80% of the listings and not all of the players, including some of the ones at the very top of the list, played an equal number of matches. The top Mael only played 40 matches, but the 5th place Mael had almost 100. Between the two of them, which do you think had an easier time maintaining his win ratio? Obviously the guy who played less matches, since he didn't have as many opportunities to fail as the 100 match guy. The same logic can be applied to the GC's as a whole, and is proved by the Adders/Flames results. Adders "beat" Flames in win rate 66% to 53%, but their sample pool only has 3 players. How is this a fair comparison? It's not. It tells us absolutely nothing in regards to which GC preforms better in terms of win's and losses. Keep in mind that if I had limited the sample pool to the top 10 players in win rate, Adders would not have even been represented at all, meaning Mael would have still won, with Flames trailing just barely behind them... and Adders would be at 0% by default because, according to the listings, they weren't even "good" enough to be there. I'm pretty sure those 3 players who scored above a 50% win rate would beg to differ, but, hey, that's what the standings say, so it must mean Adders totally suck right?

Obviously not.

The only thing this data does tell us is that, on my server, Maelstrom have FAR MORE players queing for PvP than either Flames and Adders combined, but that's literally all we can surmise from this data. It is impressive that they maintained a high average, but there's nothing to say that if Flames and/or Adders had an equal number of players that they couldn't do the same. This tells us nothing about GC performance, only personal performance. To know how the Gc's stack up against one another, we'd need to know the total number of matches played in each GC (which is impossible to calculate because we don't know how many of the players in the listings overlap in matches), and the average win rate of each GC over the course of their total number of matches. That data is not made available to us. So trying to compare which GC is "better" or "worse" using the standings is pointless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurogaea

Btw, here's something to give you an idea about the victory rates and differences of the GCs PvP stats on the Primal servers. Maelstrom has more wins, Adders have less wins (more than Flames), but have a better win ratio than Flames, and Flames have more matches (they get in more often) so they Rank Up pretty fast.

http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodest...hly/?sort=rate

---

Unless you are one roulette from hitting rank 50. Then duty finder decides to eat itself

Alot of the problem, in my opinion, comes from people not knowing how to disengage. A fight for one node turns into us chasing around a group of adders or mael for the duration of three nodes. If you join the horde, youre part of the problem, if you dont, youre sitting with like three other people. Ive said it in game, imo, its better to do stupid things together, than do smart things by yourself, but sometimes this back and fourth for 10 minutes costs us the game.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Februs

The fact is that the loadstone standings are there for personal stats....

---

You can get some useful, although slightly biased, information out of the standings if you analyze it properly.

See my analysis here for Aether a few months ago for my methodology: http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxiv/t...=1#post3215327

You have to sort by number of matches, not wins or win rate which will be strongly biased toward pre-made groups. You also need to calc the total number of wins & losses so that you weight players with more games more heavily. Last time I did this analysis it only required a small adjustment and gave reasonable looking win-rates.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Farrell

Unless you are one roulette from hitting rank 50. Then duty finder decides to eat itself

---

45-50 in one week. Flames do get in there matches fast. btw, 10% win ratio. :/

Correction: week and a half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Februs

.

---

I never said anything about what GC is worst exactly by those standings. The standings themselves can give you a clear idea of what is going on with the GCs in the PvP servers. Btw your example is pretty much what I typed a while ago (more matches and victories), so instead of saying, "This doesn't prove anything", then come with a better solution. It was just to give others something to look at to have a better understandng of what I meant, not an answer to whats the best GC. In fact, premades aren't even a factor. Any GC can have a premade and even then players can still lose, strategies be damned. You can be the best commander out there, but your likely to be wrong, or right. 50-50. Same for the other 2 teams against you.

So as I said before, Maelstrom wins more, but plays less matches. Adders win less than Maelstrom, but plays more than them Maelstom. Flames have a less win ratio overall, but have more matches than both GCs. (Primal Server)

And I'm not doing a table for this, if I need to make one just so you can acknowledge my point then do it yourself. Shutting ideas down and calling them pointless, got anything better?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GillBates

Alot of the problem, in my opinion, comes from people not knowing how to disengage. A fight for one node turns into us chasing around a group of adders or mael for the duration of three nodes. If you join the horde, youre part of the problem, if you dont, youre sitting with like three other people. Ive said it in game, imo, its better to do stupid things together, than do smart things by yourself, but sometimes this back and fourth for 10 minutes costs us the game.

---

Why, hey there Bates.

I agree. Most of the most horrific losses I've seen caused by our own actions have been because of the Flames inability to break from combat when they need to. Actually, an extension of that is the overall slow response time. I've seen some teams respond very snappily to commands and call outs, get to the target asap, and have the upper hand, but teams that are slower to respond, or hesitate before moving, tend to cost the team.

It kind of follows what you said about doing stupid things together rather than smart things alone. The same thing goes for having a responsive team. It's important to make good calls, obviously, but it is almost more important to have the entire team commit to those calls and move as a team in a quick manner. If half the team is fast and the other half slow, you get divided and destroyed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Blubbers

You can get some useful, although slightly biased, information out of the standings if you analyze it properly.

---

That's true, but I think people underestimate how skewed the results are. To the best of my knowledge, there is no way whatsoever to account for overlapping matches between players in the match tab. So, for all we know, the actual number of matches played are substantially lower than the calculated number. That by itself has a HUGE effect on the outcome of the average.

You're numbers are by far the closest I've seen to being accurate, partially because you at least tried to account for the margin of error, but there's still no way to completely tell with certainty the actual GC standings. The only thing we can be 100% certain about is our personal standings/performance, and people are dramatically underestimating the value of that information.

The fact is that there are some players who consistently score a certain win rate (which is why I singled out that tab in my example). I, myself, usually score around 40% almost every week, regardless of the number of matches I play (usually around 40-50 a week). Yet there are other players who are consistently scoring lower and pointing the finger at their GC or being ganked by other GC's as the reason. I don't think that's the right way of looking at it. If someone has a lower win rate than the top players in the standings, they should be asking themselves what they're doing differently, not instantly blaming their GC with biased data that somehow explains it away as being typical of their performance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurogaea

Snip.

---

First off, you seem to be still following SE's imposed stupidity of the 1000 character count for typed Forum messages. So, to help you out, I advise using the "Edit" function to get around this. It seems a shame to have you type two messages to finish off such a small bit of text when you could just Edit your first message to add in the stuff SE wouldn't let you type the first time. It's a dumb system, but until SE gets their heads out of their butts, we're stuck with it.

Secondly, Pre-mades actually do make a huge difference both to personal performance as well as GC performance. In fact, Pre-made parties are one of the reasons that GC comparison results get so skewed. Large groups that que together share the same win rates and match counters, but it's impossible to distinguish which matches they played solo and which matches they ran together. So, they contribute to data in the standings that account for a huge margin of error. I didn't mention Pre-mades in my comment, so I'm not really sure where you were going with this, but I can assure you that Pre-made parties are a huge factor in that they make an actual comparison between the 3 Gc's all that much harder to accurately qualify.

Also, I didn't lay out the numbers to say that you were wrong. You're actually right in regards to your que assessment: Mael has the most players congesting their ques, so, in total, they have the lowest match rate but the highest win rate (due to a bigger sample pool). Flames have the highest number of matches but lowest win rate (given they have the least players and are most easily swayed by early week casual ques), and Adders fall somewhere in the middle. The thing is, and my point, was that none of this really matters in regards to personal performance, and personal performance is what these values are supposed to be reflecting.

If you want a solution to a poor win rate than you have to look at your own performance rather than laying the blame at the feet of your GC. This may, perhaps, not refer to you personally, but it happens a lot on the forums. We constantly hear "oh, my win rate is crap because I'm in such and such GC." That's BS. Your GC has nothing to do with it. The quality of match, and the quality you bring to the match, is what makes the difference.

This is where we're gonna have to agree to disagree, because your seem to discount effort in regards to rewards. You state that "you might be the best commander out there, but you're likely to be wrong, or right. 50-50." You're half right. Any decision a commander makes is either right or wrong. There's only two outcomes. However, you are dead wrong to assume that the outcome is 50-50. A good commander does not guess. They calculate. There is a reason that, in the standings, some players are consistently scoring a high win % and why some players are consistently scoring lower, and it has a lot to do with the level of skill brought to the match.The three Adders players who were in the sample pool can probably attest to this first hand. Considering the majority of the Adders player base were not even represented in the above 50% win rate pool, those 3 players have to be doing something differently than the rest. Seeing as how winning is a team effort is seize, its a safe bet that the leadership they, or someone else, is bringing to the matches they are participating in is above the average.

The point is that the only data that standings can accurately give us is how we personally stack up compared to other members in our own GC. You ask if I have anything better than skewed data? I do. I have 100% accurate data that tells me that I have room to improve, and should buckle down and make better in-match decisions to improve my win rate, because there are other Flames out there who are better than me. I can make that assessment because I have the stones to admit I'm not perfect, the GC standings show it clear as day, and that my failures are my own and not my GC's fault.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Februs

.

---

Wondered how these comments looked so darn long. Thnx for that.

I suppose premades would effect the standings win/ratio wise as the players in the party would receive the same rewards and win rates most likely leaving the premade players all together in one standing page. Along with that, solo players as well as the premade parties will be with them as well. Thats why I ignore premades in the standings or frontlines. I'm a healer mostly (get tired of it so I blm dps), and I have my reasons for thinking Flames have it bad. Since we have less Flames queuing I often see the same players. When this happens it makes it easier for planning later strategies.

Now the problem is if your not in a premade party, just about no one cares about your strategy. Your one alliance can have no healers or just one and 3 to 2 summoners who refuse use or didn't even bother to get Scholar. Another group often chases random strays getting lured and killed by waiting enemies. Not saying other GCs don't have that, I'm sure they do. Though with the little numbers we get Its mostly the little care of winning and strategy. Btw I'm a PS4 player, healing my fellow alliances is a pain with the dpad scrolling and often its too late (I try anyway though :/ ). I used to give little orders and even won a few, very few. Asking to disengage a fight is a hassle, as some wouldn't care, or cant hear(s.e.)/see the text prompts.

For that solution thing...you just basically told me to "Get Good" without sounding like a troll, so I liked your comment for that. lol jking (kinda). I can see improvements done, maybe investing in a separate mouse for targeting alliances better for multi healing. Although saying its just that one person who makes all the difference makes me laugh a little. I can basically say its that tanks fault for not being godlike and getting us more points. Or it is my fault for not playing dps when we had 2 more healers than we already needed. Also there's a trick that most don't take advantage, in the morning there's less queues, so its mostly 24 man matches. Flames premade, done. Alot of the 24 man matches were sweet for Flames as we cooperated more and less reliance on multiple players, just your team. 72 man matches, well if your not in teamspeak with a buttload of PvP players, you better hope they listen or miraculously developed a Hive Mind all working together to win. I could be Rambo from Hell killing everything without dying, and giving orders, while everyone else acts like (someone famously clueless) gives out orders and they follow them instead. That one person makes a win thing is debatable. Unless you mean others should'nt blame the GC for losing then your right, that is BS. My win is mine, my loss is mine, my reason for losing is mine, my GC belongs to those players who are also apart of that GC, so we share our wins and losses, so if several players decide to say "Duuuuuurr (runs into enemy lines not giving 2 cents)" then that obvious loss is mine as well.

Appreciate your advice though, that word limit is bs. Also the other stuff was good too. (Premade advice)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurogaea

Wondered how these comments looked so darn long. Thnx for that.

---

Anytime! I used to be in the same boat a while back and had to google it XD. I still haven't figure out how to put multiple quotes in a single post though. Not something I've needed to do often, so I never looked it up, but I suppose I should try to figure that one out...

And I think you're starting to pick up what I'm putting down. In regards to the Pre-mades, it's also an issue of not knowing how many of them are actually quing together. For example, say the top two Mael players in "matches played' tab have 410 and 415 matches played, respectively. It's easy to just add the two and say, "okay, Mael has 825 matches played in total," but the problem is that, for all we know, those two players know each other and que together frequently. If they qued for every match together except the last 5, than the actual total of matches played is only 415. Worse yet, if they only played half the matches together it's actually 600 matches. Since we don't know who's queing together it's difficult to say, and the number discrepancy really throws off our averages when we do the calculations.

I sympathize for your healing. I also play on Ps4, and the single reason I have not finished leveling a healer is because it seems to be the only job class in the game that has a dramatic disadvantage in targeting, especially when there is an Alliance. I know there's a "digital mouse" (L1+R3) but it locks your hotbar and camera in place, so I don't find it nearly as useful or as efficient as an actual mouse and keyboard. I can't say for sure without actually trying it myself, but I know I'd feel bad only being able to heal my immediate party members if there was an alliance member dying right next to me and I just couldn't target them fast enough to pop off a heal...

As for the commander thing. You're totally right about the fact that one person cannot win the match single handed. That being said, I do believe that good calls do make the difference. Players who just sit back and "go with the flow" often just end up following the herd of superderps and get squashed. Good leadership and map awareness is key. It's basically a two way street. Good leadership needs a team that is willing to work as a team, and a team that is willing to work as a team needs a solid direction, which requires good leadership. The problem that I find is that players frequently assume that a certain win % is the signature of certain GC's and use it as an excuse to explain their own poor win record. They never put two and two together and see that all the matches they've lost have a direct tie to either not working together as a team or not having or following good shout outs. It's true that there's not always a leader available, but that just means that someone has to step up. There's a lot of negative voices to outshout and the responsibility is high, but if you want to win you have to expand than people gotta improve their own skill set and step out of the comfort box of silent mindless derp'ing.

When it comes to the Flames, I find the early week is the most difficult time to deal with it. The VAST number of casual que'ers they get after each reset is brutal and extremely difficult to deal with. The quality of matches and players improves dramatically closer to the end of the week.

From word of mouth, does any other server cluster have better Adders? This is killing me how bad overall Adders are over the past two weeks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Februs

Why, hey there Bates.

---

(Ive never really talked on the forums before)
Hey Februs, fancy seeing you here.

I agree completely. A responsive team is a winning team. It always breaks my heart to see 80% of the team head to a node, with 20% doing their own thing. Callouts, especially with sound effects, are so key. I havent seen this happen as much, but sometimes theres too many cooks in the kitchen, which brings its own hosts of problems.

Ultimately, I think it comes down to experience. When I first started seal rock, I would shoulder tackle my way into the middle of a crowd & get ganked, I would sit on a node by myself for l33t defense and I pay attention to chat during downtime. Joining a linkshell was a godsend. At least that way, we have some influence over the mob

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GillBates

Joining a linkshell was a godsend. At least that way, we have some influence over the mob

---

I figured, lol. I haven't seen your name in the Forums before... but I'd recognize that hat anywhere XD.

I agree. Experience makes a big difference, and I think it shows the most in our GC's win/loss rate during the week. I played a few games in the late hours last night, that were remarkably better in quality than the crap I was putting up with Tues-Wed, and people were actually responding to the call outs and moving as a mob. I really don't understand how noobs don't get that bit. It's the simplest thing in the world to not split up and have strength in numbers, but the biggest mistake I see in noob groups is dividing their forces across the map and getting steamrolled for it.

I wish I could say that a LS helped with this. I'm part of two (used to be 3), but on my server they're useless. The players are not active enough and no one responds to call outs. I've been pretty much forced to roll solo the whole time.

*yawn* need more people to help me herd the sheep of flames from getting themselves slaughtered :T

I don't know why people keep saying flames are so bad still. Adders are without question the weakest of the three GCs lately. If you're trying to get us (as in maelstrom) to keep underestimating you guys its not gonna work lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dimitrii

I don't know why people keep saying flames are so bad still. Adders are without question the weakest of the three GCs lately. If you're trying to get us (as in maelstrom) to keep underestimating you guys its not gonna work lol.

---

Mael and Flames: Rivals for Life lol... or, at least until SE eliminates GC restrictions.

Seriously though, that is how it actually feels sometimes. There have been matches I've been in where the Mael and Flames have been in such a heated contest against one another that when the Adders show up people get angry because they had the indecency to cut in. They're all like, "get the hell out of here, Yellow!! We're busy!" lol.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Februs

Mael and Flames: Rivals for Life lol... or, at least until SE eliminates GC restrictions.

Seriously though, that is how it actually feels sometimes. There have been matches I've been in where the Mael and Flames have been in such a heated contest against one another that when the Adders show up people get angry because they had the indecency to cut in. They're all like, "get the hell out of here, Yellow!! We're busy!" lol.

---

Adders always have to piss in someone's cereal towards the end.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Postcards

Adders always have to piss in someone's cereal towards the end.

---

Yeah, and in the games I've played, it's usually ours...sometimes Mael's.

The reason adders are so bad is because good players either switched GCs or quit frontlines. I quit frontlines, got to 50 and gave up on getting the coat. I refuse to level up to 50 on another GC so I wont switch but I refuse to play with the adders. Even if we have the most points we lose it because of the terrible players Gridania draws in.

Primal Adders are absolute garbage and are beyond redemption in Seize. They continuously find creative ways to hit new lows. There's no wonder the Serpent Steed is the most rare. Going hard for 3+ weeks on this thing and only 50/100 wins. Absolute trash. Maelstrom and Flames are much better. The fact I couldn't transfer for the duration of this farce to a better cluster for Adders sucks. Thanks a lot SE.

Switched to Maelstrom 2 weeks ago from being in Flames for so long, and my win ratio is now pretty much increased to 70%....but that's because I have less matches to get into. 8 to be in fact (I played Metal Gear Online around that time to my defense...) but each 2/8 times I lost and I've never had a win streak of 5 when I was in Flames (Primal Server). Going to keep keeping record as this doesn't prove anything. Just want my coat and looking for a better way.

lol.........

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurogaea

Switched to Maelstrom 2 weeks ago from being in Flames for so long, and my win ratio is now pretty much increased to 70%....but that's because I have less matches to get into. 8 to be in fact (I played Metal Gear Online around that time to my defense...) but each 2/8 times I lost and I've never had a win streak of 5 when I was in Flames (Primal Server). Going to keep keeping record as this doesn't prove anything. Just want my coat and looking for a better way.

---

I think getting faster queues with flames would have been a better strategy. :T I got my coat within 10 days (around the same time I hit rank 50)

around 80 matches in 2 weeks before I switched and only had around 11 wins. Wish I played with you more. :/

adders come from tree huggers and trees are more susceptible to flames, but flames are weak against water .... it all makes perfectly good sense really.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kurogaea

around 80 matches in 2 weeks before I switched and only had around 11 wins. Wish I played with you more. :/

---

I still find that mind blowing that you had such a terrible win rate. Don't get me wrong, my last couple weeks were not all that hot with Flames (see what I did there?). I also stopped playing as much because of MGO and hitting rank cap (finally... oh man, the grind was real), but my average is still well over 30%, and I went several weeks over 40-50% going on 10 game streaks. The idea of having 11 wins in 80 matches is so far gone from what I've seen in Flames PvP that it's on the same level of telling me that Leviathan showed up on the beach node and drowned everyone in the match...

I will say that in the most recent matches I've played with the Flames, there has been a marked reduction in leadership from my best weeks. It seems I am not the only one who has hit 50 recently, because I noticed a lot of the familiar faces who do call outs and strats were missing, replaced by a tremendous serge of noobs who had no idea what they were doing. It was tragic.

lol... i went over to mael to see what was so different from adders.. trust me mael and flames have no agreement.. mael players actually try to play seal as intended which is wait for nodes spread and defend.... adders and flames like to kill... rng ofc course plays a big role.. but from the matches iv'e played so far i can safely say adders and flames players are thier own enemies

scanning this thread anyone who can say flames is better than adders is day dreaming... flames was and is still about the worst gc i have ever encountered in pvp since frontlines.but in all honesty it depends on your luck of alliance and team work. first time i tired mael i went 22 outta 80+ matches which was worse than when i played with adders, yet i saw ppl in my ls on mael with over 40 plus wins when rankings came out.
i tried again and hit 22 wins out of 89 with mael... and i realiswed all gc have bad players and anyone can have a bad luck week of pvp lol..

All the gcs have their moments of awfulness and superiority. It's just that flames have faster queues which to me make them better lol.

I spend 2h in flames que on Chaos datacenter. Mael usually takes 30mins, never tried adders tho.
Flames always start winning once I go back to mael and vise versa, feels like Im bringing doom to my current GC *sadface*