Talk:Tactics (PvP)

Articles I'd like to see in the Tactics section:


 * Art of Interrupting
 * Effective Monking
 * Effective Shutdown
 * Spiking
 * Pressure
 * Countering Casters ... Spirits ... Shouts ... Enchantments ... Hexes ... Nukes ... etc
 * Positioning
 * GvG Flag Running
 * Solo Ganking GvG NPCs
 * Splits
 * Breaking Defensive Heavy Teams

and so on .... --Drekmonger 08:35, 9 February 2007 (PST)

Stabbers comment in my userbox regarding merging this page, and Category:PvP tactics: "The delete tags are only to be used for obvious deletion requests such as housekeeping or vandalism. For everything else propose the deletion in the talk page please. For Tactics (PvP), there is an excellent reason for keeping it: targetting users to an amorphous category blob from the main page is less than helpful. This page should be treated as an introduction to items in the category. S 21:07, 12 February 2007 (PST)"
 * Why not put the description from the Tactics (PvP)) above the amorhous category blob of Category:PvP tactics. And treat it as an intorudction to items in the category. ? I think that would be a great idea :)--Narcism 21:14, 12 February 2007 (PST)
 * Because category pages are not articles. S 21:15, 12 February 2007 (PST)
 * Well can we name the differently? Ones tactics pvp, and the other is pvp tactics... ?--Narcism 21:19, 12 February 2007 (PST)
 * No, because disambiguation in category pages looks awful. I would rather see "PvP tactics" at the bottom of a tactics article than "Tactics (PvP)". There is a reason the article is disambiguated -- the Tactics attribute. Strictly speaking, I would prefer the article to be renamed to "PvP tactics" if we must have a foolish consistency. "Tactics (PvP)" is preferable because you can write, and it gets turned into "blah blah blah tactics blah blah" automatically (i.e., the wiki software automatically strips the disambiguation for you). S 21:23, 12 February 2007 (PST)

This is incorrect: "This differentiates it from strategy, which is entirely carried out before the game based on the current metagame." Strategic decision-making occurs during the progress of a game as well. For instance, a decision to split or to turtle is strategic, whereas a decision to bodyblock a runner is tactical.

Move to "Guide to PVP?"
I think this would be a good move, the current article is too closely related to the tactics attribute. With this move, we'd be able to provide a more accurate range of assistance towards players, than just discussing what pvp 'tactics' are. (Terra Xin 08:06, 9 September 2007 (UTC))
 * Anyone opposed? &mdash;  ク  Eloc  貢  01:16, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that this page should be moved.
 * --Otao Ganor  RD  21:20, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * i disagree but only b/c the article itself is not a guide. this article is written more as a definition. it doesn't actually outline any actions that should be taken once the player gets into pvp. if it was written to actually instruct readers, then i'd be all for it. -- VVong | BA 21:29, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * /Agree with Wongba. This article is a "What Is", not a "How to".  Calor  (t) 21:31, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * why don't we just forget the move and create the pvp guide? is it really necessary to move the info on this article? -- VVong | BA 21:33, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Perhaps "PvP Tactics" would be a better move
 * --Otao Ganor  RD
 * Dis-regard my last comment.

--Otao 18:22, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

State of the Game
Doesn't look like it's maintained anymore. Should it be removed or just marked with some kind of historical note? 128.255.216.144 15:51, 17 August 2009 (UTC)
 * With a late reply,i hope someone can shine some light on this page,currently its a page with no useful infomation and too near to the warrior atribute in name,Should we merge it with Guide to PVP,because ive never heard of tactics out of pvp apart from dodging and tanking.-- Nei l2250 User Neil2250 sig icon5.jpg 15:53, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Inaccurate
This page gives a poor representation of tactics and strategy as both occur inmatch. While buildwarsing, a type of strategy may occur before a match in tournament play, strategy calling usually refers to decisions made regarding the match as a whole (IE choosing at what points to split, push, fall back, etc.) while tactics calling concerns gameplay at skirmish level (calling spikes, targets to pressure, etc.). If no one minds, I'd like to update the age to reflect this. --TahiriVeila 16:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
 * All strategy ends when you press enter match. Everything in the match is tactical. Making a build is strategy, having the correct equipment is strategy, designing your spike and team defense is strategy. Countering splits, splitting, collapsing, pushing, spiking is all tactics. --Draygo Korvan 17:00, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Jake said you're dumb inb4 NPA. Strategy doesn't end when you enter. A team that buildwars another team, skillbar-wise, would lose against another team of almost equal skill that used good tactics. If you know what hall you're gonna GvG in/what you're going up against/when and where to split, you'll probably win. I think Jake is probably better than you, no offense, and his idea is better. -- Dee Strongfist  19:13, 21 January 2010 (UTC)

Looking for some more community feedback here, i'd like some input so i can modify/expand this page.--TahiriVeila 04:45, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * It's just semantics. If people can understand the article as it's written now there's no need to change it. [[Image:User_Felix_Omni_Signature.png]]elix Omni 05:27, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * There's not much article, which I think is the point here. In regards to strat vs tactics, I'd lean more toward Tahiri's definition (at least in gvg) as each game is largely independent of others, so long term strategy occurs ingame anyway, and I view tactics more as micro-level stuff. While build choice does set strategy to a certain extent, the overall strategy can be modified ingame based on various factors, so I would hesitate to restrict it through that definition. Regardless of where that line is drawn, updating/expanding this page seems like a good idea (though I haven't checked exactly what is already in the terminology, so that could be a matter of linking and updating that article), and Tahiri is more qualified than most to do so. For input get it on whatever community page it is for comments or just ask some of the pvpers here directly. --67.240.83.137 05:53, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * We already have pages for individual tactics: Kite, Split, etc. Some sort of link list to those kind of pages, perhaps, but I don't see a reason to duplicate that info here. Manifold [[Image:User_Manifold_Jupiter.jpg|19px]] 16:06, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I was thinking of doing something along the lines of defining what strat/tac are and then linking to various pages which give a more detailed description of different actions, like kiting, splitting etc.--TahiriVeila 16:38, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll expand on my earlier comments as the argument is completely semantic, but fun anyway. Tactics and strategy are sometimes used interchangeably although they shouldn't. A tactic is a means to an end, a strategy is an overall plan. Planning requires forethought, and usually you don't devise strategy midmatch. Before you enter a match you already have a plan in place on how you are going to win the general match (not knowing the map in advance) and what your fallback plans and options are in dealing with certain strategies fielded by the opposing team. Reacting to a split I wouldn't personally define as strategy. Splitting is a tactical play to attempt to gain a temporary advantage somewhere (usually at the flagstand, in your base, or the opponents base) in the match. But it's ok, because apparently I'm dumb. --Draygo Korvan 22:31, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Planning represents a portion of strategy, but strategy is always subject to change. Strategy refers to your plan for winning the match, tactics are the means by which that's accomplished. Your strategy might initially be to fight 8v8 at flagstand, but if you begin to take heavy pressure you might make a strat call to split a ranger. Tactics would be things like dodging pindown, calling for pushes, calling for spikes, calling for snares. I'm not disagreeing with you I'm just saying your definition doesn't allow for strategy to change mid-match, which it does.--TahiriVeila 16:43, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * And often splits are designed to achieve clearcut victory. You might make a rapid strat change whereby you split the flagger, ranger, and warriors through the back of an enemy base while the midline and backline block the enemy gate to prevent enemy monks from entering so that you can rush the lord and end the game. That represents a distinct, mid-match change in strategy from an attempt to win 8v8. It definitely does not consist of an attempt at a temporary advantage, the majority of times splits are an attempt to secure an outright victory.--TahiriVeila 16:46, 8 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Changing strategy mid match is tactics, not strategy. If you are devising strategy in the middle of a match you are in trouble. Before you hit enter match, you already devised who would be possibly splitting if needed, how you would respond to various attacks on your base etc. Enacting it is tactics. A change of strategy or plans to an alternate strategy or plan is a tactical decision by definition. Often teams can enter a strategic discussion post match where they went over the tactical choices made and try to come up with a better main or alternate plan(s). Planning to me requires the players to have time to fully understand and be able to input their own opinion into the plan. Sure you might have a split with a plan to gank the lord, that happens a lot especially on druids isle. If your players know the strategy a head of time you will be far more effective at pulling it off than if you try to explain to your newbie ridden team how to do a lord gank. The lord gank itself is the strategy, the caller calling for it is a tactical decision. If he has to explain how to do it, he is explaining the strategy mid match (note not devising, the strategy is already devised). Which often isnt a good thing and usually leads to failures in execution where post match you have to go over that you want your backline/midline to form the block on the vine bridge while your damage dealers blitz the lord, and while the warriors are on the lord you want your cripshot ranger to prevent the monks from running around easily giving your warriors more time to carry out the gank. Strategy is planning, tactics are decisions made in the here and now in order to accomplish the objective of your strategy or strategies.
 * Lets go back to your gank example. If your entire team, including your tactics caller do not know of the possibility of the gank before the match starts, and they discover it in the course of the match as an option, talk about it, then execute it - then they have devised a strategy mid match. Execution, by definition is tactical. --Draygo Korvan 19:40, 9 February 2010 (UTC)
 * The wiki is not suitable for documenting this kind of information, why?


 * Tactics change (skill, PvP & map updates)
 * Differences of opinion (arguments)
 * Wiki would have to consistently update their info, and it would take forever to reach a consensus on anything in relation. I'm quite happy with a dictionary.com definition for the word 'Tactics'. Forums are better suited because you know that its opinionated rather than defined. (Xu Davella 07:02, 11 February 2010 (UTC))

This disagreement is stupid.


 * strat·e·gy
 * a plan, method, or series of maneuvers or stratagems for obtaining a specific goal or result:


 * tac·tic
 * a plan, procedure, or expedient for promoting a desired end or result.

They're interchangeable. Deal with it. People "call strats" in the middle of a match, and that's the term that has been used in Guild Wars since forever ago (i.e., Eternal Raine was the "strat caller" for idiot savants). In this case, Goldenstar is right and you are not. Stop trying to over-define and split hairs. Strat calling mid-match is how teams win - changing your entire game plan based on any deaths you've taken, pressure the opposing team has at stand, how open they are to a lord gank, etc. That's not simply a tactics change, that's a change of strategy. You are altering not only how you're playing, but also the end goal you're playing to achieve. That is done mid-match constantly (and honestly, any team that is incapable of changing strats in the middle of a match will never get very far).

Uh, I dunno how much you PvP, but this scenario happens pretty much every single match. It is rare for a team to be able to go in and follow a single plan that they devised pre-game all the way to victory, simply because they're playing against other people. In PvE, you can expect to follow a strat from beginning to end, because the monsters never change. When fighting people, everything is changing constantly, and you are forced to change your entire strategy in the middle of a match to keep up with the other team. I'm not talking about tactics, like the simple act of pushing forward or killing NPCs, I'm talking about strategy, what your team is playing to achieve. That changes constantly, and is not simply pre-game planning.

TahiriVeila, any help you can give to the PvP section here would be most welcome. If people without your understanding of the game are getting in the way of your changes, just send them to me. - Auron 14:29, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Obaby I feel all warm and fuzzy auron agrees with me! I'm on break next week so I'll take a look through some of the stuff here and start updating when I get some free time--TahiriVeila 16:00, 4 March 2010 (UTC)

The current state of this article is deplorable. Even more so, considering that it is linked from the main page. Currently, a link to Category:PvP tactics would serve the reader a lot better. --Xeeron 17:05, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

More info on the discussion page
Better info here in the discussion page rather then the article itself :( I was hoping to read something I had that had never dawned on me here just in case something was lacking in game experience already.  Remove this uninformative section as has been mentioned already?--  -shmE k  ( talk ) 10:36, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

So, uh.
What happened? &mdash; Raine Valen   19:59, 29 Jul 2010 (UTC)