Thanks for sharing that, Final Word. That was an interesting read . At least I find it interesting to read backstory about the teams, thought processes and decisions. The BG style of fighting can certainly impact a couple of these stats. Based on my own experiences I do think that these closer distance type of fights that the BG style usually revolves around tend to be more scrappy. Which is not to say bad, but perhaps less planned out and a bit more opportunistic if that makes sense.
"5) Top two contenders focused away from each other until late, and TEAM ended up being the one squashed in the middle."
I feel like this happens often and that a rework of the map/regions/VP distribution would be good.
I hope that there will be more shared stories & more reports too!
Thanks for the pictures, Kazah.
I think, I expected the anglosphere ptp to be bloodier and was surprised to see that it looked relatively calm. However, as Basher wrote, there might be a lot more hammers around there still, that's impossible to know from an outside perspective. Overall, the anglosphere ptp certainly seems more competitive and I do believe that I've seen KGW be on top of the VP/day at times not too long ago which probably brought hope to the victory race. It would be interesting to read more from another perspective as well.
The .com had potential to be tight as there were times in the first half when the VP lead (both total & daily) was starting to look hard to eat up. Similarly there was some hope when Elite, TVV and TK allied up and were running some attack operations. It was on the late side of things, where they probably felt like they needed big results which didn't come. I guess Elite, TVV and TK had their own set of problems as well that made it hard for them to fulfill their potential, which might not have been enough either way, but I'm sure it could've been more than it amounted to. However, it's hard to bring together people and get them to commit to a plan. In all likelihood we had some of the same issues in Lords two years ago on the RoA server, so I can relate to that.
My thought behind making this thread wasn't to say that Heathens is better than everyone else, but I think they have worked hard and wanted to add a perspective that showcases this a bit.
If this was a comment for me, I didn't say anything about growing less :? I said that on a larger map, you can take regions by simming more easily than on the smaller map, since regions will be less contested. You might have thought I meant simming as in higher pop, but that is not what I meant. On the larger map, you can easily settle in "boonies" to get control of regions, while the smaller map is a lot thighter.
Now, you didn't post the stats for population, but if I read this right, the players on anglo have more pop? That actually further underlines the point - more pop is needed to take control of regions than on .com = most likely more competitive.
Anyway, I'm not flaming any team, nor saying that one is better than the other or not - just that from the stats, anglo one looks more competitive.
The population is quite even, the players in TM and KGW are slightly bigger on average, but they're not using all the 60 slots.
Alliance Player(s) Ø Points
1. Heathens 60 14391 863458
Alliance Player(s) Ø Points
1. KGW 56 15821 885999
2. TM 56 14629 819230
The growing less part was about what Frozen Angel wrote:
"Fourth point is that the English server had more competitions in early and mid server - which caused everyone to grow less. when you're busy fighting over stuff you grow less right?"
The nonsense comment wasn't good, shouldn't have made it, but it wasn't directed towards Frozen Angel. Rather some other comments I've come across before making the thread. I'd be grateful if we can move past that 
