Guild Wars 2

Of course a lot of people would like GvG, i would like to see larger game modes along the lines of 10 v 10 to 30 v 30. You’re engine is great enough that there wouldn’t be much of an issue handling larger maps and more players but we’d definitely have to avoid zerging mentality. I think we have to take a look at other competitive games when we examine game modes. We could definitely have Capture the Flag style game mode very easily with some builds being very mobile. I like how inventive Anet gets with some of the activities and would love to have that incorportated into some casual pvp modes. I would imagine a keep vs keep requiring bomb planting or some sort of intel stealing mechanics would be interesting.

I believe people are just sick of the stale metas and game modes. They don’t need to be balanced out of the gate you guys are testing the edge of the mists and the few of us who do still pvp would love new game modes to come out and just use our feedback to help balance it over time possibly allowing ranked modes for them also. I truly feel Mists needs to be 1 server and u must must allow dueling for the sake of ppl theorycrafting and passing time for queues.

Also has been quite a null period since the last pvp map has been added. I think if you are working on a new game mode its with new maps in mind but i feel legacy of foefire would be a great start for a capture the flag game or even a bomb plant game mode also. You would have to create a reason why ppl would want to occupy the sections of the map a bit or even add some clutter but those are thoughts that would take some time. If i can think of anything else i’ll post some more.

Solo Queue for 10v10 (or 8v8). (Although not really a new mode, this could just replace the Solo 5v5 tournament and/or 8v8 servers).

The issue is 8v8 wasn’t designed for the new maps it completely dismisses any skill to the pvp because it just becomes a numbers game as the most effective route is 1 bunker 7 roam as one. I can’t see 8v8 or 10v10 being viable on the current modes and maps.

I really love all the idea people are coming up with! My biggest concern is that people want so many different things like 2v2, 1v1, 15v15 but what do you guys want for the actual structured PVP. I dont mind some of these things to be thrown in just for fun, but 5v5 has to be the core. We need to come up with a centralized competitive aspect for GW2 because then it will give something for the devs to balance around.

15v15 and 2v2s do sound like a lot of fun but not esports friendly and balance friendly when there are twelve different gametypes with all different team sizes. It will also fracture the playerbase. I also thought the point of the custom arenas was to be able to create all these different team size stuff. Maybe if players had better options (choose respawn timer and location) then this wouldnt be such a problem. Why cant ppl just make their own 2v2 tourneys using the CA?

What i want is CTF, conquest, KOTH and something else so then we can have a rotating tourney playlist. HoH from gw1 sounds amazing but i feel like in GW2 and no monks… you cant be truly balanced. ex: AOE kill way will prob destroy any team comp in KOTH, for CTF most mobile, and for conquest bunkers. So there HAS TO BE build swapping in between matches and NO character swapping AT ALL.

Moba sounds awesome too. kudos for all the great ideas on that but it would prob take forever to develop and test out.

Returning.8125:

IWhat i want is CTF, conquest, KOTH and something else so then we can have a rotating tourney playlist. HoH from gw1 sounds amazing but i feel like in GW2 and no monks… you cant be truly balanced. ex: AOE kill way will prob destroy any team comp in KOTH, for CTF most mobile, and for conquest bunkers. So there HAS TO BE build swapping in between matches and NO character swapping AT ALL.

I would suggest that it would come out better if you had NO build swapping and NO character swapping once you are in the que. It would force comps to build in flexibility if they don’t know if they will face Conquest, CtF, KotH or whatever else. It is impossible to balance for all of them at once, but if you leave an element of uncertainty on what the next map will be with no means to adjust for it, then versatility becomes more valuable than optimizing for a single mode. I think that would add more depth and diversity to the tPvP. In addition, the slow pace of balance patches will become less critical, because no single OPTIMAL team comp will exist like there is when there is only one game mode. There may be a comp that is strongest in a particular map/mode, but in order to win multiple matches would require a team comp that has the flexibility to adjust from map to map.

Has ANet given up on capture point PvP?

Thedenofsin.7340:

Has ANet given up on capture point PvP?

Yeah once they’ve released the new game type they’ll delete the old one

Myrmidian Eudoros.4671:

I would suggest that it would come out better if you had NO build swapping and NO character swapping once you are in the que. It would force comps to build in flexibility if they don’t know if they will face Conquest, CtF, KotH or whatever else. It is impossible to balance for all of them at once, but if you leave an element of uncertainty on what the next map will be with no means to adjust for it, then versatility becomes more valuable than optimizing for a single mode. I think that would add more depth and diversity to the tPvP.

I agree with what your saying! It would definitely add more depth and diversity. I was just aiming at allowing the build swap so if you run into those troll teams… you still have a shot at winning. Its too hard to be truly balanced in this game with no dedicated healers. I also didnt want matches to then come down to.. oh well we auto lose because the other team has X warriors for example. it may allow for some build counter playing/ adjustments before match starts instead of just straight up swapping classes.

JonathanSharp.7094:

No, not necessarily. In the future, we could do a combination of game types, in the same way that Call of Duty does multiple game types, or counter strike does multiple (escort or disarm).

We’ll have to see how that pans out, based on fan feedback.

Jon, one thing I thought of that might help queue times (might be difficult to program depending on how things are set up, though). Let’s say you end up having a 1v1 Duel game mode, 3v3 King of the Hill, 5v5 Conquest, and 10v10 Assault. When you queue up, you are given the option to check off ALL of the game modes that you wouldn’t mind being queued into. For example, if you queue alone, you could check off all 4 game modes, and the system will queue you into whichever of those modes that has the first queue pop. If you try to queue with a 2-person group, it will only allow you to queue for the last 3 options, but you can select any or all of them that you and your friend want to play. If you can make this work from a programming standpoint, I think it would greatly address the concerns about splitting up the game population between modes.

Mode fps(SD,search and destroy)

sorry fo my english…

-2 Teams: attack the other defends.
-X number of rounds, based to the rules, for example 7.
-Part-time: 4 minutes maximum
-Objective, victory conditions for attackers:
1) Install the “bomb” and detonate.
2) Eliminate the opposing team.
-Objective, victory conditions for defender.
1) disarm the bomb
2) eliminate the opposing team.
3) be alive after the time allotted without the bomb explode

-Selected to start the attacking team who will take the bomb, site to ask the bombs are simply capture points in conquest mode.
-After the start there is no way to spend a bomb to an ally, this one died when an ally can recover.

-to interrupt a defusing or priming, you must kill, stun or stupor, the person in action

-The time for plant the bomb is 4 seconds.
-Time for defused the bomb is 5 seconds.
-After activation, the time to defuse the bomb is 40 seconds maximum.
There are currently none point regeneration of life fight, all pv lost can not be recover by these spells.
-Defusing-can be performed by one person at a time.
-The heal-skills can not be used twice per round
there will be only two places for plant the bomb.
-Once dead-no respwan is only possible until the next round start

ps:I love google trad xD

JonathanSharp.7094:

Phaeton.9582:

Thedenofsin.7340:

Has ANet given up on capture point PvP?

Yeah once they’ve released the new game type they’ll delete the old one

No, not necessarily. In the future, we could do a combination of game types, in the same way that Call of Duty does multiple game types, or counter strike does multiple (escort or disarm).

We’ll have to see how that pans out, based on fan feedback.

Hi Jonathan,

The current game mode is good. Really good, in fact. I believe the problem isn’t the game mode, but the incredibly long turnaround time for fixes and adjustments. It takes 2 months to get sPvP fixes pushed out to the user, and I think that kind of lag is counterproductive to the health of the game.

Outside of a ‘free-for-all, F’ it!’ kind of mode, I have difficulty in seeing how any kind of additional game mode would flourish with a 2 month turnaround time for fixes.

Thedenofsin.7340:

JonathanSharp.7094:

Phaeton.9582:

Thedenofsin.7340:

Has ANet given up on capture point PvP?

Yeah once they’ve released the new game type they’ll delete the old one

No, not necessarily. In the future, we could do a combination of game types, in the same way that Call of Duty does multiple game types, or counter strike does multiple (escort or disarm).

We’ll have to see how that pans out, based on fan feedback.

Hi Jonathan,

The current game mode is good. Really good, in fact. I believe the problem isn’t the game mode, but the incredibly long turnaround time for fixes and adjustments. It takes 2 months to get sPvP fixes pushed out to the user, and I think that kind of lag is counterproductive to the health of the game.

Outside of a ‘free-for-all, F’ it!’ kind of mode, I have difficulty in seeing how any kind of additional game mode would flourish with a 2 month turnaround time for fixes.

Most people I played the game with and talked to left because of the map.
It’s a niche map.

It’s a fine style, as an option to pick from or the core of a sort of tournament… but as the central map to all of GW2 PvP… it’s trash.
It probably drove away far more people than any other part of GW2.
I can see new modes, if they are well made (which isn’t going to happen) seriously helping the game.

Anyways, their balancing… the 2 months in between ill done patches… that didn’t do the game any favors either.

payload race

2 teams push the cart competitively.

Kenshin.6154:

MOBA type game mode: the best it would be for everyone to just forget that idea, no matter how many different ideas you have about progression, unlocking skills etc. It just won’t work. The games would be too long and boring.

I don’t think this mode would be boring at all, It would be longer than a normal game, that’s true. But boring? no don’t think so.

Kenshin.6154:

Large scale GvG: I don’t like the idea about this at all. It would just turn up as another zergfest. Small guilds or competitve teams would not be interested in this because of lack of players or the fact that in a competitive team you want skill level of players to be roughly at the same level. If you want large gvgs you can do your zerging in wvw as you did til now.

If this is designed right, so there is not one objective on the whole map, you can form small squads and be more effective than any Zerg. You might want to say, in WvW there are several objectives, too. You are right, but for WvW you also get a lot of Exp and Gold while Zerking.

This game mode should not only consists of rushing into a castle, that would be bad and lead to Zerking. Instead there need to be several events all over the map, so you need organisation. Probably Supplycamps, allie camps that fight with you, towers …
The gamemode just has not to center around killing the enemies keep loard, even if it is the main objective and leads to the victory

Kenshin.6154:

Hero’s Ascent type game: this sounds like a valid idea; I would stay away from the relic runs as the ones on HoH map, they are unattractive and boring (2 guys running for 10 mins while the rest of the team can take a nap… booooring); annihilation, cap points, KoH are all viable options here; team size should not be greater than 6 players.

Sounds like current tournament, with the new game modes included and randomly chosen, doesn’kitten Would be interesting.

Kenshin.6154:

Guild versus Guild format:
-game length: 15 minutes
-team size: 5 or 6
-win condition: score 500 points
…

In my opinion you think of to small teams, I think for a GvG it should be at least 10v10 and 15v15 would be even better.15 min is to short for such a game mode, this has to be doubled at least. I think the interesting part about GvG are the different tactics you use and plan, depending on the actions of the enemy. It is not about killing the Guild lord or pure man power in first place, even if first is the goal. I like the idea with the idea with the Score, with this you can prevent one or both teams from “camping” and it is a little tool to keep the pressure up, but I would increase it as well.

@Thedenofsin.7340: I think this 2 Month break between the patches is bad as well. I know that some changes need more time than others (changing casttime → animations → sound vs. number tweeking) and sometimes those changes need time to be accepted by the community as well (which needs time as well) but if there is a huge balance problem, we should ne have to wait for 2 month until the fix will be released. Because fighting 2 month vs. a OP meta isn’t fun at all.

Jamais vu.5284:

MOBA wannabes
Just no. GW does what GW does, MOBAs do what MOBAs do.
The “base assault after collecting buffs” game mode is already in the franchise, and done better – it’s called GvG. The two most popular PC games don’t need another clone, when GW already has it’s unique answer to that. Besides, do you have an idea how long those were in development and testing? This is maybe something for GW3, and only if they make it what Conquest was to GW2 by pouring all their energy into it.

Those game needed to be developed from zero, everything for a moba is implemented in GW2 in some way or another. The missing link is the map and someone tinkering all together.
NPCs can follow routes, Leveling could be done by downscaling and/or receiving skill points, you can buy armor, weapons, runes, food, …
In my opinion GW2 would have a lot of benefits to other mobas, because of its uniqueness. Every class can play every role, so it is not that “rock paper scissors” (champion X beats champ Y), It is a active fight with dodging, …

Returning.8125:

Why cant ppl just make their own 2v2 tourneys using the CA?

Because it costs $40 and then you have to pay $3/day to keep it open?

Survival

Both teams are assigned a captain. If the captain dies, you lose. Team mates need to balance their play around defending their captain and killing the enemy captain.

Maps need to be designed in a way that conservative play from both sides is not going to be the optimal way of playing. Maybe a buffing capture points in the middle of the map or something

JonathanSharp.7094:

The current thinking is that a tournament could be decided by something like (using your examples):

1st game: Capture the Flag (not saying we’d do that, but it’s an example).
2nd game: One of the Conquest maps.
3rd game: King of the Hill (not saying we’d do that, but …you know the drill).

That way there’s variety, which means teams need to be strong in multiple game types.

@SinDen: Yep, we have a lot of cool features that are being worked on right now for PvP. A lot of them are really big, and take a lot of time to develop. That’s just how things are unfortunately when it comes to those new systems. I do think that new game types, in addition to the new features, would be good though, and that’s what we’re aiming at!

No offense, but GW2 PvP isn’t taken all that seriously, so that more ‘hardcore’ style tournament rotation you guys have got going on won’t help anything.

Your tournaments are the hotjoin of any other game.
What would help the game ALLOT is allowing people to choose which maps they want to play. Renaming tournaments to soloQ and teamQ and making it so you can choose which maps you want to que for would do wonders.

Yes SPvP is your attempt at filling that role, it was a bad attempt.
It’s an entirely different playstyle (super zergy, with auto-balance making it impossible to consistently fight on the same team as friends) than TPvP.

Pvp never really took off because of:
- lack of competitive infrastructure
- combat system itself – pace of the game mainly
- learning curve, along with lack of incentive for PvE players to play pvp or even go to the mists.
- game mode

To be fair with conquest, we don’t know if it was the main reason that turned players away of pvp. So adding new game modes without an improvement on the other areas could lead to a worse situation: no more popularity for pvp and a split player base.

Having said that, the absolute lack of any strategical or tactical talk for over over a year is a good hint of the depth of conquest:p :p :p just like the fact that the game is played exactly the same as launch, with only one major move discovered, the party stealth opener.

A good game mode should meet some criteria in my opinion and an interesting part of the conversation could be to come up with a sort of checklist of these criteria. I’ll start off with a few examples:

- is it solo friendly? Team friendly?
- Is it simple enough so anyone can hop in, get a decent grasp as to what to do and have fun immediately?
- is it complex enough to allow for ultra competitive play both solo and team?
- does it have enough secondary mechanics and are they impactful enough so that each game offers a wide variety of strategies?
- does the pace of the game allow for clutch moments along with some more """""quiet"""" ones?
- does the game mode mechanics allow for fair come backs? Rather than the losing team pulling a trick and end up winning without really outplaying the opponent?
- does it promote both collaboration/synergies between players and team spirit (which are two different things IMO)

There are probably quite a few more of these criteria, but I think a good game mode should at least meet those ones!

I think the more important (despite what I want) modes would be plain and simple team deathmatch. Personally I probably wouldn’t play it, but it is the most straightforward mode to get into and can be re-used for “RP’d” modes (1v1, asuraball, etc.).

klarkc.3754:

MOBA Mode

This is the one I want. You guys did do the MOBA last year for Halloween, so you have had some experience with it. I think you would have to be really iterative with this and keep it simple for the start (normal PvP with towers and AI mobs) – then branch out into other ideas such as unlocking skills as the game progresses and see what our feedback is regarding those. We all have ideas as to how the MOBA would work, seeing as MOBA has never been done in an MMORPG we are in new territory here – we are going to need playtesting by the playerbase in order to see what works.

Whichever modes you choose I also think that the new game modes should be released as betas – by that I mean there would be no reward on completion of the match. Let us playtest them with you and give our feedback about which ideas we think work and which ones we don’t; without having people get mad when the modes are unbalanced or glory is farmed or something. Possibly sync up your releases with the Living Story and keep iterating every two weeks on the current game mode. We would probably be able to provide better feedback once we get our hands dirty with the game modes. Maybe some of the modes we come up with, while good on paper, are bad in the game.

Allowing us to help you playtest early on (without risking messing up glory or rank) is really a great way to collaborate on development with the community.

2v2 is logistically the easiest bracket size for peeps to enjoy

very hard and time consuming putting together 5 man teams. Even in WoW with millions of pvp’ers, 5v5 is a pretty dead bracket because 2s and 3s are so much easier to organize.

flag capture modes for spvp would be great

or modes that mix domination, flag capture and deathmatch together in various ways

When working on a new game type i only hope that the goal is to allow for more diversity in play styles.

Current conquest is mostly catering to a variety of bunker builds.

Look at league of legends/smite(dota sorta) that have a tanky player take one lane, a high dps ranged player a high cc support player a large burst/ae nuke character and often times an assassin whos good at clearing npc’s.

These game modes offer a variety of completely different play styles every game.
The game mode also allows for multiple types of battles ranging from early on mostly solo or duo fights ending later in many 5on5 full team fights.

I’m not saying a moba game type is the most important (though i’d love to see a gw2 spin on this ever after playing reapers rumble) I’m simply saying whatever mode is put in, it needs to open doors for other styles of play that currently are not valid in the conquest mode.

unleashed.8679:

Kenshin.6154:

MOBA type game mode: the best it would be for everyone to just forget that idea, no matter how many different ideas you have about progression, unlocking skills etc. It just won’t work. The games would be too long and boring.

I don’t think this mode would be boring at all, It would be longer than a normal game, that’s true. But boring? no don’t think so.

It would end up in players farming minions for the first 20 mins to unlock skills or buff their toon in whichever way would be implemented and then bashing on eachothers towers for the next 15-25 mins. Just no. Forget it.

unleashed.8679:

Kenshin.6154:

Large scale GvG: I don’t like the idea about this at all. It would just turn up as another zergfest. Small guilds or competitve teams would not be interested in this because of lack of players or the fact that in a competitive team you want skill level of players to be roughly at the same level. If you want large gvgs you can do your zerging in wvw as you did til now.

If this is designed right, so there is not one objective on the whole map, you can form small squads and be more effective than any Zerg. You might want to say, in WvW there are several objectives, too. You are right, but for WvW you also get a lot of Exp and Gold while Zerking.

This game mode should not only consists of rushing into a castle, that would be bad and lead to Zerking. Instead there need to be several events all over the map, so you need organisation. Probably Supplycamps, allie camps that fight with you, towers …
The gamemode just has not to center around killing the enemies keep loard, even if it is the main objective and leads to the victory

Ok…so in what way exactly is this any different from the current WvW mode? You got castles, you got supply camps, you got allies that can fight for you, it’s a large map (well actualy it’s 3 maps), it was designed so that you could use different tactics and strategy and yet there is only zerging all over the place. If you so desperately want large scale GvGs. Claim a castle in the mists, have you guild members join in and defend it while others servers are zerging you. Again no.

unleashed.8679:

Kenshin.6154:

Guild versus Guild format:
-game length: 15 minutes
-team size: 5 or 6
-win condition: score 500 points
…

In my opinion you think of to small teams, I think for a GvG it should be at least 10v10 and 15v15 would be even better.15 min is to short for such a game mode, this has to be doubled at least. I think the interesting part about GvG are the different tactics you use and plan, depending on the actions of the enemy. It is not about killing the Guild lord or pure man power in first place, even if first is the goal. I like the idea with the idea with the Score, with this you can prevent one or both teams from “camping” and it is a little tool to keep the pressure up, but I would increase it as well.

You obviously don’t understand why it would be bad to have 10v10 or 15v15 on more than one level. So again…If they would seriously consider having such a large team size mode as competitive mode, then first: it would be a royal pain in the kitten for the developers since they would have to rebalance every skill coefficient in the game which would make even more disparity within the game as a whole; secondly having such big team sizes would lead into zerging in one way or the other, there is absolutely no way for that not to happen (if they implement more side objectives to discourage zerging the game mode would get more and more complex with each new map, which sooner or later would discourage new teams from even trying to get into the game mode because of the high initial level of knowledge needed about the maps); thirdly: when you have team sizes like that, it soon becomes organizational and planning problem: you need to make sure everyone shows up at agreed time, you need to make sure everyone understands what they need to do, you want to have the best players possible in your team (if you want to say that you can just replace that person with another player then you never played gvgs on at least semi-competitive level, if you replace just one person in 8-man team, your teamplay will suffer, what do you think it would happen if you replaced 4 or 5 in a 15 man squad). If you really want to see fun and exciting games to watch then you need a game mode in which the team sizes are as small as possible, but still big enough to allow different tactics and split sizes within the game itself so 5v5 or 6v6 not more than that.

JonathanSharp.7094:

The current thinking is that a tournament could be decided by something like (using your examples):

1st game: Capture the Flag (not saying we’d do that, but it’s an example).
2nd game: One of the Conquest maps.
3rd game: King of the Hill (not saying we’d do that, but …you know the drill).

That way there’s variety, which means teams need to be strong in multiple game types.

You have to Randomize it Chap. If the order is always the same then it leads to undesirable behaviors like people farming the first match with a comp that owns that game mode and then leaving the tournament, or everyone running the same comp because the Championship match of the tournament heavily favors it.

Kenshin.6154:

It would end up in players farming minions for the first 20 mins to unlock skills or buff their toon in whichever way would be implemented and then bashing on eachothers towers for the next 15-25 mins.

Why all the anger?

If that’s your view of MOBAs you have been playing it with the wrong people. If done incorrectly your perspective could happen; but in general MOBAs do a lot of balancing effort around the risk and reward of killing players versus killing mobs. Mobs are reliable xp/gold but certainly won’t win you the game. As I said, MOBAs haven’t been done in MMORPGs before so we will have to feel this one out – but I do think there is the possibility of potential for a great and interesting game mode there.

Or it could be horrible. Saying either is guaranteed to happen is short sighted – which is why I’m a big fan of the iterative approach; because it’s the only way to determine if any of the new game modes are actually worth anything. CTF could be absolute junk as well, for all we know (because we don’t – it hasn’t been playtested).

Kenshin.6154:

If they would seriously consider having such a large team size mode as competitive mode [… good stuff …]

Agree completely. The current PvE/WvW balance is great for GvG. GvG arenas in PvP were merely a stop-gap or a cop out for dealing with this aspect of the game in WvW (one that I actually suggested or agreed with in the past). Now that they announced the Obsidian Sanctum GvG arena I don’t think this is one that the PvP developers need to bother with; the concept of GvG in HoTM has become completely obsolete. To add more fuel to the fire, how do you even allocate rank for GvG’ers? What happens when a rank 20 GvG’er who has never played 5 man team games joines the solo q?

5v5 works in Mobas with just a hand full of cooldowns to look out for and extremely simple combat mechanics. But it just doesn’t work well in competitive MMO PvP imo, with each class having 15-20 abilities(in group fights = 150-200) it’s too hard for players and spectators to keep track of each classes cooldowns and understand exactly what’s going on. Combined with all the pets you get a big mess of a zerg.

Most friends that I started playing with thought of gw2 conquest as the same as hotjoin of other MMOs and wanted a 3v3 or 2v2 deathmatch for competitive play. We were all long time MMO-PvPers and fans of gw1 so we expected competitive PvP to be about coordinated pressure, damage, target swaps, and cc, making use of this games awesome combat mechanics. Instead we got a gamemode of standing in a circle, running, outnumbering and raw damage.

With gamemodes that are heavily objective based you rely too much on players enjoying the game play provided from these objectives (bunkering, afking on sidepoints, etc)rather than enjoying the combat itself. Deathmatch provides the core satisfaction in MMO PvP. Killing other players, and thanks to competitive human nature it never gets old.

I know over 30-40 players that would return and give gw2 another chance if they heard about a new 3v3 or 2v2 dm gamemode. It’s also so easy to find 1 or 2 friends and jump straight into competitive play, but with such a small pvp playerbase left finding 5 players with the same schedule, skill and timezone is nearly impossible.

GVG a must Also reward honest players not skyfarmers , cheers i posted a solution in a topic , check it out devs

Hugs.1856:

Pvp never really took off because of:

- combat system itself – pace of the game mainly

<snip>

- does the pace of the game allow for clutch moments along with some more """""quiet"""" ones?
<snip>

Probably slightly OT for this thread but I’d love for you to elaborate a bit more on what you mean by that. Are you saying the game is too fast or too slow? Personally I’ve found it’s a lot harder to execute team plays in combat than it was in GW1, but I’m not sure if this is because of the faster pace of the combat or because of the different RPG system (classes being less specialised and more self-sustaining, eg. you can no longer ensure a kill by putting Diversion on the enemy’s monks, because your target will have their own heals as well).

I think if you’re discussing game modes it should be hand-in-hand with a discussion of the pace of the combat, as the action mechanics determine the scale of the fights. I’ve long suspected that then reason the devs chose Conquest as the main game mode is because they realised that the game is great for smallish fights, but full-on team fights are so fast-paced, chaotic, and drowned out in particle effects, that they become an indecipherable flustrecluck. I even remember Helseth streaming and saying something along the lines of “even top-level players have no idea what’s going on in big fights”, so clearly team fights in this game are a serious problem.

Nonetheless, the community has clearly expressed the wish for bigger team fights rather than a game mode that forces teams to split up. This is apparent not only from the numerous calls for TDM and GvG in this thread, but from the various 10v10, 15v15, and 25v25 “GvGs” (inverted commas so as not to mix them up with GW1 GvG game mode) happening on the borderlands in WvW every week. Even though the game is fundamentally unsuited for them, a heckuva lot of people are into that sort of thing, and have found ways to make it interesting, competitive, and enjoyable.

So, while this is a much bigger discussion beyond the scope of this thread, I put it to the developers that new game modes won’t be enough. Ways must also be found to slow down the pace of the game and encourage more team plays. There are some interesting mechanics in the game that are great for team fights (combo fields, the rally system etc), which don’t really live up to their full potential in the 1v1s and 2v2s that form the majority of fights in Conquest. Let us help you find ways to put them to use! Surely you didn’t invent a combo system purely so people can lay down water fields at the feet of a dungeon boss and heal the melee damagers piling on him?

manveruppd.7601:

So, while this is a much bigger discussion beyond the scope of this thread, I put it to the developers that new game modes won’t be enough. Ways must also be found to slow down the pace of the game and encourage more team plays. There are some interesting mechanics in the game that are great for team fights (combo fields, the rally system etc), which don’t really live up to their full potential in the 1v1s and 2v2s that form the majority of fights in Conquest.

Right now i think that combo fields and finishers are ideal for fights of 2-5 scale, that way you can really play around them, and all of them have a use. Moreover i’m certain that slowing the pace of the game in fact destroys all that makes the current fluid action so great. Slowing the pace has a positive impact on zergplay – negative impact on small skirmishes. Moreover I feel that the rally mechanics are perfect for 2-5 scale as well. It is exactly in larger fights that everyone just spams blindly hoping to rally before getting cleaved down.

fix conquest so its not always 4 mid and 1 home dawg! skyhammer could have been good but the panels and falling off the map pretty much killed any hope for that. If that was removed then you would have different starting split variations. 1 home 2 hammer 2mid? etc hence not doing the same thing over and over for each map.

Moba
________________________

Kenshin.6154:

It would end up in players farming minions for the first 20 mins to unlock skills or buff their toon in whichever way would be implemented and then bashing on eachothers towers for the next 15-25 mins. Just no. Forget it.

What zamalek said, just because it is different to all other MMOs out there doesn’t mean it has to be bad. I think it is possible, with the current mechanics of the game and it definitely would be fun. Maybe it is nothing for eSports, because it is totally different.

GvG
________________________

Kenshin.6154:

Ok…so in what way exactly is this any different from the current WvW mode? You got castles, you got supply camps, you got allies that can fight for you, it’s a large map (well actualy it’s 3 maps), it was designed so that you could use different tactics and strategy and yet there is only zerging all over the place. If you so desperately want large scale GvGs. Claim a castle in the mists, have you guild members join in and defend it while others servers are zerging you. Again no.

Yes some kind of small scale WvW, but with a few differences:

• There won’t be any leveling and farming involved, because I think that leads to all that zerging in WvW. On my server and others, too, no one is defending towers, because you can recap them within few minutes and get Gold/Exp for it. standing there and waiting for the enemy, scouting, Dolyak escorts, supply runs, fake attacks, … all those tactic elements don’t give any reward, so they are not used.
• You will only fight other guilds, no/less randoms involved.
• The teams size is fixed, so there is no advantage by size. (except your guild is <10 or 15 people)
• All with the same armor and level, so it depends more on the players skills and teams tactics.
• It’s your team/Guild that wins the game, many people don’t care about the server at all in WvW.

Kenshin.6154:

Guild versus Guild format:
-game length: 15 minutes
-team size: 5 or 6
-win condition: score 500 points
…

Where is this different from the current Legacy of the Foefire?
It is the Guild lord, that makes you win the game instantly. Isn’kitten

Kenshin.6154:

You obviously don’t understand why it would be bad to have 10v10 or 15v15 on more than one level. So again…

This are you points:

• rebalance every skill:
  I don’t think so. Skills are balanced for WvW (much bigger scale), too. Although I think you can’t compare those two modes, because of the much higher stats you can achieve in WvW/PvE.
• lead into zerging:
  see above
• Could be to complex for newbies:
  So what? Of course you have to learn all the tricks. But where is the problem with this? It is not only killing the enemy, it needs teamwork, tactics, … challenging content for guilds that need teamwork.
• No place for variety in teams:
  How does SoloQ work then, if everyone in GW is unable to play with different people? You should at least know the people within your guild a bit, so they are not totally random to you.

I think for a guild the usual 5 or 8 slots are to less to play together and they need bigger maps to do so. GvG shouldn’t be like this:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32Ag461QnGU
only found a Russian version or so

I suggest you urgently to improve team-matching / team-balancing more accurate and consequent. I do not play Tournaments, because despite the good rewards waiting for 2 – 5 minutes and joining a game where the team members rage-quit or drop after half a minute and leaving you 2 versus 5 is not really fun… Removing AFKers should happen almost instantly and without much consideration too.

Team-Balancing fails in not-tournament matches too. Most of the time one side has 1 member more, which is under most maps a quite advantage. Even if this situation wont hold long, because someone would eventually enter the game, the points earned in this time are most of the time enough to win the match. I suggest you to implement a “bonus points per second on captured points” for the Team with lesser member counts.

Besides i always encounter maps where one side clearly dominates the other one, which is always disencouraging. Also Team balancing should jump in much more faster than now, and not letting precious time flow and wait minutes before moving someone to the other team. If you have considerations about moving Guildies and Friends from each other by aggresively moving players to other teams ; i point out that this is not important on solo arenas.

And PLEASE let us have arenas where “Downed” state can be turned off, so instakills should be possible. This aspect of PvP is most unbalanced between classes. Having a thief or Mesmer go invisible or Teleport themselves out of harm before they die really makes it annoying for classes with lesser movability like Guardians.

I also suggest you to lessen the points earned for killing players and increase it for winning points/ clearing objectives. This would prevent the a Conquest game become a Free For All Orgy.

MOBA – too much PvE in that PvP

GvG – the sizes of teams people are throwing out (10v10, 15v15, 20v20!) are WAAAAY to huge to make a functioning team. Good luck getting 9 of your closest friends to log on at the same time. I think the best way to satisfy all these people really attached to GvG is make an offshoot of WvW which is capped at like 20-25 players and make it instanced so the guilds can go throwdown there. sPvP is for balanced, competitive, spectate-worthy competition. GvG doesn’t fit into this model

2v2 or 3v3 deathmatch – love this idea. My favorite part of WoW PvP. Much easier to form a team and compete. Much easier to understand what is going on from a spectator perspective as well.

Capture the flag, payload, “de” style bomb plant/diffuse – All these would be good as well and work in both a hotjoin and more structured ranked environment.

Kavia.8249:

MOBA – too much PvE in that PvP

GvG – the sizes of teams people are throwing out (10v10, 15v15, 20v20!) are WAAAAY to huge to make a functioning team. Good luck getting 9 of your closest friends to log on at the same time. I think the best way to satisfy all these people really attached to GvG is make an offshoot of WvW which is capped at like 20-25 players and make it instanced so the guilds can go throwdown there. sPvP is for balanced, competitive, spectate-worthy competition. GvG doesn’t fit into this model

2v2 or 3v3 deathmatch – love this idea. My favorite part of WoW PvP. Much easier to form a team and compete. Much easier to understand what is going on from a spectator perspective as well.

Capture the flag, payload, “de” style bomb plant/diffuse – All these would be good as well and work in both a hotjoin and more structured ranked environment.

2 v 2 would be epic. 3 v 3 idk though, would be too much like today’s mid fight.

JonathanSharp.7094:

The current thinking is that a tournament could be decided by something like (using your examples):

1st game: Capture the Flag (not saying we’d do that, but it’s an example).
2nd game: One of the Conquest maps.
3rd game: King of the Hill (not saying we’d do that, but ...you know the drill).

That way there’s variety, which means teams need to be strong in multiple game types.

@SinDen: Yep, we have a lot of cool features that are being worked on right now for PvP. A lot of them are really big, and take a lot of time to develop. That’s just how things are unfortunately when it comes to those new systems. I do think that new game types, in addition to the new features, would be good though, and that’s what we’re aiming at!

Ideally having these modes separated out would be best; else you’re forcing players who like game mode X to have to play Y & Z along with it. Although from a technical development side, it probably makes sense to lump different modes together so you don’t have to develop multiple management systems for each/etc.

I’d really just say; don’t cut corners here and really look at how successful pvp-based games implement their systems. GW2 is fun, the new modes on here suggested sound awesome; it’s just the supportive systems around it that would and do make it difficult (e.g. add or improve: in-game leaderboards, multiple-separate queue based-game modes, informative and clear UI’s for these game modes (think LoL loading screen where it shows you who you’re going against, their base skills picked, etc), spec swapping systems, informative tips when loading into a match, etc). Standardizing and formulating appropriate data in a more ’in your face manner’ is something that could really be improved upon and is necessary for these new game modes to be successful.

I haven’t had the time to check every single post so some of this may end up being repeats of others posts, if so just take it as me throwing in my support for said idea.

I’ll begin by saying that I think conquest is a perfectly fine game made, however how it is implemented currently isn’t perfect. First of all, one person should not be able to stop a cap if 2 or more of the other team is on point. This system places great importance on the mid bunker. If there is a 2v1 on a point then the the side with 2 should start slowly capping the point. It should be slow enough that the bunker is still worth having around, but doesn’t necessitate zerging the point in order to take it.

The current design of the majority of capture points also tend to be a tiny little circle, this makes AoE very effective. Making them not a uniform circle would not only make things more interesting – it would allow you to avoid AoE without leaving the capture point. Some of the other maps could also use some more interesting geographical features. Maybe Graveyard could have actual tombstones and mausoleums that can be used to break line of sight. If you wanted to get really creative you could make them breakable as well for added visual flair.

As for new game modes, I’ve always been a fan of asymmetrical gameplay. Fort Aspenwood was one of my favorite maps. A PvP/PvE mix mode would be good for getting the PvE only crowd to at least try it out, especially if you gave out PvE rewards.

In fact, having cosmetic rewards for playing PvP would be a great way to tempt the PvE crowd – especially if the skins are cool looking. A monetary reward would likewise have the same effect. It would be a good alternative to doing boss farms.

JonathanSharp.7094:

The current thinking is that a tournament could be decided by something like (using your examples):

1st game: Capture the Flag (not saying we’d do that, but it’s an example).
2nd game: One of the Conquest maps.
3rd game: King of the Hill (not saying we’d do that, but …you know the drill).

That way there’s variety, which means teams need to be strong in multiple game types.

@SinDen: Yep, we have a lot of cool features that are being worked on right now for PvP. A lot of them are really big, and take a lot of time to develop. That’s just how things are unfortunately when it comes to those new systems. I do think that new game types, in addition to the new features, would be good though, and that’s what we’re aiming at!

Personally, I wouldn’t implement it that way. Two main reasons:

1. Time. Sometimes people just want to queue up for a single match, and won’t necessarily still be wanting to play 45 minutes later when the 3rd match will end. The current system allows you to play for 15 minute blocks of time in a competitive setting, and removing that option shouldn’t be done lightly.
2. Preference. Some people love playing all the game types, but many others have their favorite and don’t want to be forced to play the others that they don’t like as much. You can see that already with maps — some people hate Skyhammer, and others want to play nothing but Skyhammer. More choice is always better, especially for the less hardcore players that simply don’t want to put themselves through the trouble of playing and mastering a game mode that they don’t enjoy.

If you can add new game types, provide options, but keep queue times reasonable, I think that’s the best possible outcome and should be your goal in development, in my opinion. If it’s just not possible or too difficult to implement right away, that’s understandable, but I think that your proposal of just having a single queue that forces the players to play all the game types is a suboptimal solution and certainly a compromise at best.

• Small teams: 2v2, 3v3
• Deathmatch/Arena for small teams (like GW1)

Actually we need a game mode that is similar to deer hunter. So you got a team of really big norns with rifles and killshot as their only skill. And then you have a bunch of asuras that you hunt. Big-game asura hunter!

Recreate Heroes’ Ascent in GW2.
Im sure you know what I mean with it.
Nothing too fancy, no gimmicky maps, just straight 8 vs 8.

JonathanSharp.7094:

For the GAME TYPE, people seem to be asking for:

• 2 lords. If you kill their lord you win.
• There are obstacles in the way (a lot of people use the MOBA analogies of having NPC’s or towers in the way…you defeat these in order to get to the opposing guild lord).
• I assume there’s a time limit?
• Do we do VoD again to stop people from turtling?

Right sounds like you are asking for some clarification here. As I said a pure MOBA will probably flop, I think some adjustments will need to be made in order to MMO-ify it; that being said here’s how MOBAs generally work:

• 2 “killable things”, yes, let’s say it’s a lord. They are tanky as hell and don’t regen health.
• There are stationary obstacles in the way (the towers) that deal massive damage. Towers behind the current “front line” (and the lord) are invulnerable in most MOBAs: you need to do them in order.
• The mobs/NPCs do a death march toward the opposing lord in waves (waves are typically spaced at 1 minute apart and have 4 melee and 1 ranged mob). They meet in the middle and will generally wipe each other out (if not the next tower will). During early-mid game it’s the players’ job to disrupt this balance.
• There are usually 3 lanes – the towers and the mobs follow (or are placed along) these lanes.
• There isn’t a time limit in pure MOBAs.
• Turtlers don’t do well in pure MOBAs because of the RPG aspect of them.
• Players typically can’t take on towers – they need the mobs as a meat shield. This can change at the end-game depending on the hero+build in question.

So some of my ideas on how to MMO-ify it:

• Lords, towers, mob waves in the typical 3-lane setup. As a start. I’m not sure about how frequent the waves should be, if you make them squishy enough you could probably do the on-the-minute waves.
• Don’t regenerate the lords’ health (even out of combat). Instead killing mobs in the field will heal your team’s lord a tiny bit. This actively counters turtling during the endgame.
• It’s rather difficult to impose a time limit on the game. Considering that you probably won’t have the “temporary progression” (starting at level 1 each game) that is present in MOBAs you can probably get away with additional rules. For example, every 2 minutes your front-line towers could take 25% damage. Every 5 minutes you lose a single mob out of your wave spawns. This means that the game will push itself eventually coming down to just the players and the lords (with no way to heal the lords). This will also heavily penalise turtling.
• Don’t allow the players to boon the lord whatsoever (make him a structure like Tequatl maybe). Restrict certain boons, such as heals, on the mobs (I think – not sure about that one, could have some interesting meta).
• There does need to be some form of “temporary progression” but for the life of me I can’t figure out what it would be. Maybe have each creep kill give you an “effectless” boon that can be redeemed for other permanent (across death if GW2 allows it) boons at your base.

Just some ideas, might be bad, might be good – but it’s an attempt to try and fit a MOBA into GW2 (instead of just directly translating the concept, which I don’t think will work).

Kenshin.6154:

unleashed.8679:

Kenshin.6154:

MOBA type game mode: the best it would be for everyone to just forget that idea, no matter how many different ideas you have about progression, unlocking skills etc. It just won’t work. The games would be too long and boring.

I don’t think this mode would be boring at all, It would be longer than a normal game, that’s true. But boring? no don’t think so.

It would end up in players farming minions for the first 20 mins to unlock skills or buff their toon in whichever way would be implemented and then bashing on eachothers towers for the next 15-25 mins. Just no. Forget it.

That is a very negative description of what a MOBA is- but MOBA’s are also (one of?) the most popular game type in the world- probably because people find them fun. Really, a MOBA is just a form of spvp, and one that has been proven to be incredibly popular-unlike conquest.

unleashed.8679:

Kenshin.6154:

Large scale GvG: I don’t like the idea about this at all. It would just turn up as another zergfest. Small guilds or competitve teams would not be interested in this because of lack of players or the fact that in a competitive team you want skill level of players to be roughly at the same level. If you want large gvgs you can do your zerging in wvw as you did til now.

If this is designed right, so there is not one objective on the whole map, you can form small squads and be more effective than any Zerg. You might want to say, in WvW there are several objectives, too. You are right, but for WvW you also get a lot of Exp and Gold while Zerking.

This game mode should not only consists of rushing into a castle, that would be bad and lead to Zerking. Instead there need to be several events all over the map, so you need organisation. Probably Supplycamps, allie camps that fight with you, towers …
The gamemode just has not to center around killing the enemies keep loard, even if it is the main objective and leads to the victory

Ok…so in what way exactly is this any different from the current WvW mode? You got castles, you got supply camps, you got allies that can fight for you, it’s a large map (well actualy it’s 3 maps), it was designed so that you could use different tactics and strategy and yet there is only zerging all over the place. If you so desperately want large scale GvGs. Claim a castle in the mists, have you guild members join in and defend it while others servers are zerging you. Again no.

There are huge differences. Here are just a few:
1) in spvp there is no level/gear gap=more fun
2) in spvp you would have a real end/winner giving a great sense of achievement
3) in spvp the majority of the game would be a lot more than ZvD (Zerg vs Door)
4) in spvp you could take all the great elements of WvW and condense them into an amazing game and original game mode. Something revolutionary and that people will want to come to GW2 for.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ team sizes over 5: …
I think 5 is the biggest team size we’d want for organized play…

Look at it as cross-pollination to build a stickier game. Players that play WvW in perma zerg-fest mode usually run in guilds or groups of guilds. If these groups had a middle ground between Zerg v Zerg and tPvP, then you will get some enjoying the game in multiple modes and feed new blood into the competitive scene over time. It will never be as skill oriented as 5v5 due to the chaotic play and the fact that the combat system in this game isn’t designed for it, but it could help with retention and boost stickiness. I do understand that developing something like this would be a massive undertaking compared to adding more types of 5v5, so ignoring it for now is cool.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ King of the hill: …one big cluster of bodies. …IT SOUNDS GREAT…and then you play it…and it leaves a little to be desired.

Good to know that you tried it. I can see how that would happen, in fact I would have guessed that was the outcome of a pure KotH mode. Suppose that the Hill was the GW1 equivalent of a flag stand, and that some other objective was the true primary (i.e. a Guild Lord circa GW1). Do you think you would have the same result? I bet you that having multiple win scenarios is what would make or break it in this game’s combat. If its the only way to tick points, then it is clearly the most valuable thing, but If you could make a Lord Kill or 60 DP the opponents out, then it brings more depth to the match. I’m not advocating bringing back DP/morale the way that is was in GW (too strong in this game), but a similar mechanic that applies pressure via deaths would help make things more interesting.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ GvG: … when we’re talking about GvG here, we’re talking about a GAME TYPE. Don’t get this confused with two guilds fighting each other for positioning on a ladder. That’s something else we can do (and want to do), and that would work for CTF, or KOTH, or GvG, or conquest, etc.

Guild Halls, Ladders, all that is a whole other level of resource investment before the infrastructure is even there, so, ok, we can leave that alone for now. Thanks for the guidance. Foefire is reasonably close to being a practical GvG map now. I bet if you stripped out the cap points, put in some other secondary mechanic and changed the NPC’s in the base from completely useless to remotely formidable, then you might have something to work with there. Surely you guys have though of this. Any testing of the concept?

JonathanSharp.7094:

For the GAME TYPE, people seem to be asking for:

• 2 lords. If you kill their lord you win.
• There are obstacles in the way (a lot of people use the MOBA analogies of having NPC’s or towers in the way…you defeat these in order to get to the opposing guild lord).
• I assume there’s a time limit?
• Do we do VoD again to stop people from turtling?

Yes time limit, in the form of the Death March VoD. You need to have at least one way to win before VoD comes though that is not a Lord Kill.

“Guild Ball” (as a concept)
2 Goal points.
1 Orb.
5v5.
———————————————
-/////////////////////////-
-////////////////////////B-
-0//////////x///////////0-
-A////////////////////////-
-/////////////////////////-
——————————————-
^ Base idea of a maps features.
A = A team spawn
B = B team spawn
0 = Goal point
x= Orb spawn point

Objective: Run orb into goal point. 7 goals = win.

-thoughts-
The base objective is very simple but the execution need not be.
Through map design, concepts such as choke-points can make certain skills such as wards, marks, traps (Thieves too), and turrets more or less effective.
It’s an easy candidate for map effects like glass floors, where immobilizes, stuns and knockbacks can be used to drop the carrier or for the carrier to use to their advantage.
Additional mechanics like NPC defenders, Buff NPC’s, resurrection orbs, underwater passageways and seige weaponry can also be included. Really anything can be added or twisted, maps can be asymmetrical but the main idea is a goal area for each team, and a spawn point for the Orb.

The orb: As I see it, the Orb could go two ways
A) Own skillset,stat & trait set disabling profession mechanic.
b) Professions skillset, stat & trait set, keeping profession mechanic
I think A) is the most solid, but b) might be possible.
An example skillset of A) would be
1. Shoot ~ Shoots an ether projectile
2. Charge ~ Dash forward, stunning the next enemy you hit.
3. Forceful blow ~ A wide swing that launches foes.
4. Strength of the Orb ~ Lose two conditions, and gain swiftness
5. Last stand ~ Gain 600 Toughness and Regen.
Without a heal or a way of dropping it, the Orb Carrier is commited to it, and has to be supported by their team generally until they are downed or score. Orb should respawn if it goes out of bounds (eg falling on Skyhammer) or if you bring it to a reset area (your base, so you can’t hide inside it).

Using an existing map just to convey the concept . Take Foefire as a visual , replace the Lord with a goal point, the enemy team would have to run the orb into that point, with graveyard being the spawn point. That means busting through the gates and getting all the way to the end. With the enemy team being able to reset the orb by running into their spawn point with it, if they get the chance to quickly snag it. After the goal is scored the gates are repaired and teams are sent back to their base to go again until 7 points are scored.

What if someone trolls with the Orb?
Holding the orb reduces Endurance regeneration 50% from the start, and weakness works on top of that. Additional effects could be added on top of this if necessary, but if the Orb gives you preset ability and stats this probably wont be a big issue. Perhaps something like if an Orb is held for 5 minutes by an individual player, his team gains 1 point and the map resets.

Possible comps.
Portal and Shadow trap are potent because they let you to get back to position. If they reset the orb, you don’t want your whole team stuck in their base while they’re sending someone to the orb spawn point. A Portal or Shadow trap allows you to get yourself or team out of there. Skills like Swirling winds and Sanctuary mean allowing your carrier to have an easier time getting to the goal or allowing them to pick it up.

The orb in its spawn point would have to be channeled (as I see it) for say 2 seconds. Since you have to push into their base, even if they do reach the orb first, they still technically have to get past you, so who gets the orb first isn’t necessarily a case of who will score first.
Respawn timers would be individual so not to make pushing needlessly cumbersome when 5 people jump out of the gate all the same time

JonathanSharp.7094:

For the GAME TYPE, people seem to be asking for:

• 2 lords. If you kill their lord you win.
• There are obstacles in the way (a lot of people use the MOBA analogies of having NPC’s or towers in the way…you defeat these in order to get to the opposing guild lord).
• I assume there’s a time limit?
• Do we do VoD again to stop people from turtling?

If its a MOBA type game-mode I don’t see a need for a time limit, and turtling just means you lose.

No dev reply in regards of Annihilation game mode.

/sigh…

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ team sizes over 5: I know some people really like the idea of having games of 8v8 -> 15 v 15, but in reality, these games are often hard to set up. I think that 5on5 is much easier to organize as a player. When I was a GW1 player, playing competitive GvG, we had many nights where we had a hard time getting all 8 people on, night after night, in order to train. A lot of competitive games have settled on the 5 person team (CS, all mobas, etc.), and it’s an easier # to organize than 8 or 15 person teams.

I think 5 is the biggest team size we’d want for organized play, and we could try smaller teams, but due to multiple reasons, teams greater than 5 would probably be too large for GW2.

@ game modes vs. other features: We can do both. It obviously takes time for both, but we don’t have to choose a new map or game type versus new features. Having said that, the way the work breaks down sometimes means that a designer is needed for a game type, with a little programmer support, while a new major feature (like new rewards), may take a lot of programmer time and designer time.

@ SHOULD WE EVEN TAKE THIS COLLABORATION THING SERIOUSLY!?!??!?!?!?: That’s up to you. We are.

@ King of the hill: We’ve actually tried it a few times internally. It usually devolves into a stalemate in the middle of the map, or one big cluster of bodies. Imagine: the middle point is the only point on the map, and both teams just run right to it…..10 people pop their elites….. there’s a 5on5, and then the game is over. Are there things you’d like to add in order to spice it up a little? IT SOUNDS GREAT…and then you play it…and it leaves a little to be desired.

@ GvG: There’s a lot of equivocation around "GvG’. Keep in mind that when we’re talking about GvG here, we’re talking about a GAME TYPE. Don’t get this confused with two guilds fighting each other for positioning on a ladder. That’s something else we can do (and want to do), and that would work for CTF, or KOTH, or GvG, or conquest, etc.

For the GAME TYPE, people seem to be asking for:

• 2 lords. If you kill their lord you win.
• There are obstacles in the way (a lot of people use the MOBA analogies of having NPC’s or towers in the way…you defeat these in order to get to the opposing guild lord).
• I assume there’s a time limit?
• Do we do VoD again to stop people from turtling?

@ Giving you guys the tools so you can just make game types yourselves: I wish we could do this. I really do. This is how counsterstrike and dota were born. I was there when it happened, as a player, and I loved it. For GW2, it takes a LOT to make a map. It takes design, scripting, a map artist, programmers, a prop artist, a sound engineer, voice over, etc. It’s not as simple as “give us your tools and we’ll do it”. It takes a lot to make a map in an MMO.

Keep posting such amazing thoughts! As John said earlier in a post, we’re here, listening to you, but we love letting you guys talk among yourselves. We don’t want to butt in and interrupt you when you guys are producing such productive conversations!

I agree with everything and I’m glad that you do take time with things, but what about game modes with less than 5 people? A lot of people are discussing 2 vs 2 arenas, is that something you can do?

Is there any consideration for gametypes that already exist in gw2 but have no way to play competitively such as keg brawl being run in a custom server?