Guild Wars 2

Yasha.5963:

Jelger.6758:

“Keep vs keep, MOBA, KotH, CTF, “GvG” – popular suggestions
The second concept seems draw inspiration from GW1 and WvW alike, at times even borrowing from the other MOBA suggestions. The general consensus here seems to be that you win once you defeat the enemy lord. There are some really creative and intelligent ideas in these posts but at times these lead to some pretty intense suggestions of things that should be changed in order to make their suggestion work.
Let us assume that no mechanisms are going to be reworked, and balancing would be shared with conquest mode. The options for keep vs keep, MOBA, KotH and CTF are nothing more than an innocent shift from the 3 capture nodes to a different victory condition. I think there is a lot of room for many of these ideas to work. But let’s not fool ourselves, the current system and balancing will require a certain way to operate.

Many tPvP players will understand that KotH with one capture point in the middle of the map would be a lot like Legacy of the Foefire without keep and side nodes.
Keep vs keep will be Legacy of the Foefire without the nodes and with added NPC’s and WvW elements.
MOBA will be like Legacy of the Foefire with added NPC’s and towers.
CTF will be similar to Spirit watch but without the nodes.

Most of these suggested modes are switching the main and secondary mechanics of conquest around. All these ‘modes’ could work and be lot’s of fun - but don’t expect them to change the entire play experience. That said, they will be a great improvement to the current sPvP scene. Generally speaking I wouldn’t expect these modes to draw large numbers of new players to GW2. They would cater to different groups within the PvE and WvW communities, which could potentially turn them into sPvP regulars. But this would mostly come from the renewed communication and labels (New CTF mode available! vs New conquest map: Spirit watch) than because of an intrinsically different sPvP experience.

Thank you for reading, if there are any questions regarding my way too long and overdue post please let me know.

PS: I would personally love to hear the dev’s point of view on 3 v 3 Arena’s as a new mode. As i personally think this has the most potential for ArenaNet and the amount of sPvP players in general.

Well, playing a MOBA doesn’t feel anything like the current game mode in gw2 so I think you are overgeneralizing, kind of like saying brussel sprouts taste the same as roast chicken because they are both food. Same for CtF, although that might be somewhat closer.

Its an interesting point though. What are the primary differences between the current gw2 game mode and other game types like MOBA? What makes the MOBA set up incredibly popular and so much fun to play?

I would say the scoring system and game progression are fundamentally different.

In mobas there is a “real” sense of progress, in terms of both character power and territory “captured”. GW2 is very abstract in a way. You take these kind of meaningless circles and build points, get enough points and win.

Mobas and are not based on a “score” but on an actual objective (kill lord/destroy base), and progress toward the goal is measured in tangible terms such as towers destroyed, npc/player upgrades etc.

The player progress is also key, I think. It gives the exciting element of levelling-up and gearing-up that we have in pve while providing a totally level playing field for pvp, all in one 30-40 min game sitting.

I think there is room to really push the bounds of the established thinking of what a “battle-ground” is in mmos. GW2 is set up like a moba in some ways-limited skill set, level playing field, can start pvping straight away; but the current game mode is locked into the traditional mmo mindset imo (although the game obviously makes great progress in terms of level playing field, auto-balancing, combat, and the like).

JonathanSharp.7094:

@

@ 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.

Why not try to create a map with 3 point ,each team can only cap his point and the middle one ,each point requires at least one people on it or it slowly became neutral ,the teams needs to conquer their base point and the middle one together for at least 30 sec for score 1 point.Sry for my bad english

Might we get some dev feedback/input? This thread is awfully orphaned compared to the other ones.

Jamais vu.5284:

Might we get some dev feedback/input? This thread is awfully orphaned compared to the other ones.

+1

Capture the flag.

Deathmatch

MOBA-style.

GvG.

Castle siege (attackers/deffenders).

i think these new game modes will revitalize spvp. sounds very fun. anything but control points please!!

Capture The Flag

Win Conditions:

• Capture 7/7 Enemy Flags (Includes 1 Hard Flag or flag located closest to spawn )
• Most Flags Captured When Timer Expires
• Most Flags Saved > Capture Draw
• Most Kills > Save Draw > Capture Draw

p.s. Map terrain and thoughtful flag placement makes all the difference. Can provide more details to the above if necessary.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ 2on2/3on3: A lot of you guys really seem to like this idea. So do we. We’re looking at game types which encourage this style of play. Another thing we’re looking at it combining the size of fights with larger tactical/strategic implications, so that there is something fun going on the micro level (the actual fight) and the macro level (the map overall).

@ Moba: This plays into another idea you guys seem to be hitting on, which is a moba style game. We think the layout/flow of a moba style map could be really fun, especially when combined with something like killing enemy captains or guild lords. We’re also looking at testing something like that!

@ GvG/castle sieges: I think these can be combined in some pretty cool ways. You guys had some great points/ideas on these, so thanks for those.

@ Lords and protecting them/not protecting them: Players seem to be pretty split down the middle on this one. Some players want the “play” of protecting their Lord and keeping it alive, while other want it to be more like a MOBA nexxus – something you can’t actively heal/protect. We’ll have to try that one both ways to see what has better play to it. I suspect it’s the former.

@ Not having RPG elements in our game when compared to most MOBAS: Keep this in mind. It’s what gives the mobas their flow/pace. We need to build mechanics that change the pacing/feel of the map in a similar way, without hampering the fun players have. I think you get the same thing out of an RTS, but in a different way. Both sides start off with few resources and weak units. Over time they build up in both areas, and the middle/late game are very different than the early game.

I’ll keep looking for other things to respond to in this thread. Thanks for all the feedback/ideas guys.

Which do you personally prefer, a straight up 2v2/3v3 arena, or a larger scale map that requires smaller fights?

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ 2on2/3on3: A lot of you guys really seem to like this idea. So do we. We’re looking at game types which encourage this style of play. Another thing we’re looking at it combining the size of fights with larger tactical/strategic implications, so that there is something fun going on the micro level (the actual fight) and the macro level (the map overall).

@ Not having RPG elements in our game when compared to most MOBAS: Keep this in mind. It’s what gives the mobas their flow/pace. We need to build mechanics that change the pacing/feel of the map in a similar way, without hampering the fun players have. I think you get the same thing out of an RTS, but in a different way. Both sides start off with few resources and weak units. Over time they build up in both areas, and the middle/late game are very different than the early game.

I’ll keep looking for other things to respond to in this thread. Thanks for all the feedback/ideas guys.

I’m glad that Anet is taking these into more serious consideration. With regard to your comment about 2v2, 3v3; people just want a simple arena to duke it out. I don’t think trying to “encourage” these situations through game types and objectives will help. Those will come naturally with new game types.

With MOBA style maps, please don’t encourage gear progression. Everyone should still be equal in terms of gear, but gain point advantages through resource control. Making towers weaker by taking out trebs or something to that effect. Maybe strengthening walls through kills even. Just some ideas.

But thanks for even starting this thread. It’s giving me a lot of hope.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Jayce.5632:

Capture The Flag

Win Conditions:

• Capture 7/7 Enemy Flags (Includes 1 Hard Flag or flag located closest to spawn )
• Most Flags Captured When Timer Expires
• Most Flags Saved > Capture Draw
• Most Kills > Save Draw > Capture Draw

p.s. Map terrain and thoughtful flag placement makes all the difference. Can provide more details to the above if necessary.

So a few things on CTF:

We found that CTF works best as a “push” the flag, not “cap it by bringing it back to my base”. This means you have to push through the enemy team, and since you need to push it into their spawn, it means they can more easily defend a cap.

If it’s “cap” it by bringing it back to your base, there are often cases where the capturing team gets a flag past a certain point on the field, and no one on the defending team can catch up with them in order to prevent the cap.

We tried various mechanics, like making it so that the flag carrier couldn’t use skills, or they had to use “flag” skills, or they were just slowed down greatly, but in most of those instances, players didn’t have as much fun when carrying a flag. You can see some of this carried over to Spirit Watch and some of the issues it has.

Just some things to think about.

There are some interesting points.
Regarding “push” vs “capture”, I think that’s honestly part of the appeal of a CTF game mode – the feeling of escaping the enemy team to the point where you know a cap is secured.

For the defending team, it creates some strategy – do you send a player to the attacker’s base to intercept instead of trying to engage en route?

I wouldn’t rule it out as a straight negative.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ 2on2/3on3:

There is only one thing that you can do with such small team sizes and have it be any fun. Death Match. As much as I think it would be fun to have 2’s and 3’s Arena there is not enough strategic depth to balance the professions. If you try to level the field with a secondary mechanic, then no matter what the secondary mechanic someone will be the best of the bunch at it. Additionally this will absolutely require splitting the queues which is not a good idea IMO. There just aren’t enough players.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ Moba: This plays into another idea you guys seem to be hitting on, which is a moba style game. We think the layout/flow of a moba style map could be really fun, especially when combined with something like killing enemy captains or guild lords. We’re also looking at testing something like that!

Don’t make a “me too!” MoBA style map. No adds, creeps, minions, buff collecting. Please, no. There is already too much AI in the existing content. Less would be better. Buff collecting is just boring. I don’t want to jump through hoops for 1/2-3/4 of a match so I can actually PvP for the remainder. Toss this to the WvW team and let them put in a side element or something, but don’t make this a rated play feature, please.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ GvG/castle sieges: I think these can be combined in some pretty cool ways. You guys had some great points/ideas on these, so thanks for those.

The return of GvG is long overdue. Glad some of you are on board with it.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ Lords and protecting them/not protecting them:

No real healers in this game. Protecting the Lords actively shouldn’t be a problem, because it still becomes a Kill or be Killed scenario.

JonathanSharp.7094:

I’ll keep looking for other things to respond to in this thread. Thanks for all the feedback/ideas guys.

Some kind of a 5-objective relic assembly with persistent pieces could make for interesting dynamics if done correctly. The strategic choices of carrying vs. stashing the relics and how to split to get as many as you need would bring interesting choices to a team. Then you get the mental game of hide & seek between opponents or attack/defend or bait & ambush depending on a team’s strategy. For a secondary mechanic a Kill Race (first team to 15 kills wins) or some way to terminate respawns (and therefore win by killing all opponents) would be great flavor. Mobility would be extremely valuable in a mode like this, so you’d have to find some way to equalize it and give less mobile comps a chance.

Free For All Deathmatch would be pretty neat. It could really be done on any map. Can be up to 25 players or something (that might be a bit much unless the map were HUGE). Any amount of players can join at any time and it would still be even. For instance, no “4v5 LAME” moments. just 2-25 people all trying to kill each other. Might not be the best idea but I could see it being pretty fun.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Jayce.5632:

Capture The Flag

Win Conditions:

• Capture 7/7 Enemy Flags (Includes 1 Hard Flag or flag located closest to spawn )
• Most Flags Captured When Timer Expires
• Most Flags Saved > Capture Draw
• Most Kills > Save Draw > Capture Draw

p.s. Map terrain and thoughtful flag placement makes all the difference. Can provide more details to the above if necessary.

So a few things on CTF:

We found that CTF works best as a “push” the flag, not “cap it by bringing it back to my base”. This means you have to push through the enemy team, and since you need to push it into their spawn, it means they can more easily defend a cap.

If it’s “cap” it by bringing it back to your base, there are often cases where the capturing team gets a flag past a certain point on the field, and no one on the defending team can catch up with them in order to prevent the cap.

We tried various mechanics, like making it so that the flag carrier couldn’t use skills, or they had to use “flag” skills, or they were just slowed down greatly, but in most of those instances, players didn’t have as much fun when carrying a flag. You can see some of this carried over to Spirit Watch and some of the issues it has.

Just some things to think about.

This “cap back at base” as you’ve described it could be a problem when dealing with just one flag. This is what I’m most familiar with being called Flagball, where an entire map can go to waste when the focal point is center around one, or at most, two flags. What I hinted at above is what I’m used to calling Capture the Flag. With a minimum of 7 opposing flags to score, a team would have to decide which of their own flags they are willing to give up and which flags they can’t afford to lose, because you can’t possibly defend them all at the same time.

Do I send someone to pressure their flagbay to focus only on last minute saves? Do I potentially risk it all by going straight for the enemy’s hard flag? Should I devote someone to focus on stalling their frontline while my team runs as many flags as possible?

And the beauty of all this is it does not matter where you position the flagbays. You can’t just pour all your attention into defending one or two areas. Not when you have multiple objectives to capture and not with so many different ways to lose.

EDIT:

We tried various mechanics, like making it so that the flag carrier couldn’t use skills, or they had to use “flag” skills, or they were just slowed down greatly, but in most of those instances, players didn’t have as much fun when carrying a flag. You can see some of this carried over to Spirit Watch and some of the issues it has.

Just some things to think about.

While I don’t want to see people leaping around all over the place with flags in hand, I am of the firm believer that you should be able to use your weapon skills while carrying a flag. How about we start with testing a 3 second channel (interrupted on damage) to pick up or save a flag and hard CC (fear,daze,kd) to cause a flag drop.

Myrmidian Eudoros.4671:

There is only one thing that you can do with such small team sizes and have it be any fun. Death Match. As much as I think it would be fun to have 2’s and 3’s Arena there is not enough strategic depth to balance the professions. If you try to level the field with a secondary mechanic, then no matter what the secondary mechanic someone will be the best of the bunch at it. Additionally this will absolutely require splitting the queues which is not a good idea IMO. There just aren’t enough players.

Dude, 2v2 and 3v3 would kill conquest. But that is because it deserves to be killed. In the end conquest would come back up as a game mode when people want to play it. There will still be a bunch of clowns who only want their standing on a point bs. But let the 99% of us have our fun and give us 2v2 and 3v3 arenas. Really.

since my payload post was too brief and did not get any attention (i think) so here i am again.
based on the payload and payload race game modes from team fortress 2.

these would be nice for 8 vs 8 or 10 vs 10 hotjoin games.

lets call them:
“doylak push” (one team pushes dolyak, other team prevents them from pushing)
“dolyak push race” (two teams strives to push the dolyak, fastest team wins)

common mechanics:
- dolyak will move slowly when got friendly players nearby
- dolyak moves faster when got more friendly players nearby
- dolyak has tons of health
- dolyak can be downed
- dolyak cannot be stomped
- dolyak will auto revive itself once downed
- dolyak’s auto revive cannot be interrupted
- friendly players can revive downed dolyak
- players escort dolyak carrying magmacite to blow up destined location

dolyak push mechanics:
- one team attacks by escorting dolyak
- the other team defends by attacking players or dolyak, or both

dolyak push race mechanics:
- both teams attacks by escorting their respective dolyaks
- both teams are free to attack one another

team fortress is doing very well with so many different game modes.
guild wars 2 sPvP should not be afraid to try out different game modes.

http://store.steampowered.com/stats/
today only, team fortress 2 (released 10 Oct 2007 ) has
36,306 current players
60,762 peak players

guild wars 2 sPvP can do better!

I recall in Unreal Tournament (original, oldschool yo), the flags were kept inside your base. Capturing an enemies flag meant you had to push their base to take it then return it to your base – though if I recall correctly, you couldn’t return their flag if you didn’t have yours in your base, so the offensive/defense was balanced in an interesting way. Killing the flag bearer made the flag drop in it’s position, either ally picks up and it returns after x seconds or enemy picks up and can continue back.

The maps were relatively large, the mid point between the two basses was always something of interest – in some ways the major choke point of the map. Though there were hidden passages to get to the enemies base that required a bit of work to get through. My favourite were this map with a island floating above lava, with a mountain area in the middle. There were three caves through the mountain area which connected both basses, and harder routes through the underneeth part to flank their base (a castle) from the side.

I don’t know how well it would translate, but it was so fun in an FPS setting. Also scaled with number of players quite well. If an opponent pushed your flag and zerged you, you could stealth their flag so they couldn’t return cap. The independent/group play aspects worked well. Of course you could add additional objectives to provide buffs, portals or npc elements.

Just a thought. /roseglasses

6 teams free for all 3 vs 3 vs 3 vs 3 vs 3 vs 3 epic battle.
insert suitable name for this game mode

6 teams, 3 players each, duke it out in a small arena that resembles the crown pavilion.

6 domes
6 teams, 3 players each time.
no trebs
no cannons
no big lasers from the skies
pure raw strength

6 Meditation of Ferocity in the center part (respawns every minute)
1 meditation of ferocity under each dome (respawns every minute)

which team controls middle controls all the meditation of ferocity, of course, they still need to scores kill to earn points

first team to 500 wins.

each kills +5 points
stack as many ferocity buffs as possible and score kills to win it for the team.

no control points.
well, this is basically king of the hill death match.

simple, bloody 6 teams blood bath.

good?

Lordrosicky.5813:

Dude, 2v2 and 3v3 would kill conquest. But that is because it deserves to be killed. In the end conquest would come back up as a game mode when people want to play it. There will still be a bunch of clowns who only want their standing on a point bs. But let the 99% of us have our fun and give us 2v2 and 3v3 arenas. Really.

Exactly. There’s a reason SPVP’s conquest mode isn’t played heavily by everyone. They don’t want to play it on heavy rotation. I had no problem playing conquest mode in GW1 when it was 1 or 2 maps out of 8, or when it was part of a map with a secondary objective, such as defend fort aspenwood, or protect jade quarry’s turtle/golem collecting from the capture point. But when its 80% to 90% of the maps, AND the only other PVP mode accessible on a zerg scale (WvW), I’m going to go play another game.

I’d also be far more inclined to play a “Kill the NPC on the point, instant flip, and move on” conquest mode instead of stand on the point until capture and defend it. Moves faster that way.

Modes I’d like to see in structured pvp as it is now:
3v3/2v2/4v4 death match: Straight elimination, like stated.
3v3/2v2/4v4 countdown death match: Most kills at the end of 10 minutes wins. 1 kill, 1 point.
Push the flag: exactly like stated. Do that.
Protect the NPC large scale: See Fort Aspenwood. Defenders win if time ends with NPC alive. Attackers win if they kill it. Both teams have access to siege tools, or must keep siege tools alive, such as gatekeepers and mobile gate destroyers. Both teams also have access to some form of siege weapon depending on role.
Protect the NPC Small scale: For small scale, see the 2 team GW1 Random arena Jade Quarry map in GW1, where revival occurred every 2 minutes but the NPC must be killed to end the match. If neither NPC is killed, the team with the most deaths loses after 8 minutes.

A lot of modes could benefit from a 3 team style or even a 4 team style on a small scale. This should be considered simply for variety and play options:
3 team push the flag. You must deliver the flag to one of the other two team’s capture points. You reduce their points by 1, and gain 2 points of you own. Red/Blue/Green. First to 10 wins, or most points after 8 minutes. You cannot have negative points and all teams start at zero. Maximum of two flags in play at one time to ensure the mode keeps moving, 1 flag captured, another flag spawns. If two teams are tied for flag points, team with most kills wins.
3 or 4 team (3 to 4 players each) Death match. Same thing. Most kills at end of 8-10 minutes wins.

Lastly, GW1 Guild VS Guild. As well as all or any of the modes I’ve mentioned with the requirement that ALL players from one team must be representing the same guild flag when the match begins. Can be 2 teams or 3 teams on a map fighting for objective, would work with point capture, protection, or death.

Alliance Battle revived WvWvW style: AB was essentially a perfect sized conquest mode World vs World with only 2 teams. Instead, lets make it 3 teams: 1 team from each server, in two groups of four on a team, still 24 players total. They queue from their servers, rotate on a moderately sized map capping points. Make the capture points spread out with NPC spawns that take little time to kill, encourage that players move frequently to capture new points. Small enough to be skill based instead of zerg based like WvW is, but large enough to lose if your team sticks together and zergs one point at a time instead of capturing multiple points at the same time.
- Let it impact server rankings as well. First to 500 points wins and their WvWvW ranking points increase +200. Second place gets +100. Third place gets +50. A fairly unlikely tie = most kills wins.

Enokitake.1742:

Alliance Battle revived WvWvW style: AB was essentially a perfect sized conquest mode World vs World with only 2 teams. Instead, lets make it 3 teams: 1 team from each server, in two groups of four on a team, still 24 players total. They queue from their servers, rotate on a moderately sized map capping points. Make the capture points spread out with NPC spawns that take little time to kill, encourage that players move frequently to capture new points. Small enough to be skill based instead of zerg based like WvW is, but large enough to lose if your team sticks together and zergs one point at a time instead of capturing multiple points at the same time.
- Let it impact server rankings as well. First to 500 points wins and their WvWvW ranking points increase +200. Second place gets +100. Third place gets +50. A fairly unlikely tie = most kills wins.

this would be very nice.
we need more PvE and sPvP cross overs.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ Moba: This plays into another idea you guys seem to be hitting on, which is a moba style game. We think the layout/flow of a moba style map could be really fun, especially when combined with something like killing enemy captains or guild lords. We’re also looking at testing something like that!

@ Not having RPG elements in our game when compared to most MOBAS: Keep this in mind. It’s what gives the mobas their flow/pace. We need to build mechanics that change the pacing/feel of the map in a similar way, without hampering the fun players have. I think you get the same thing out of an RTS, but in a different way. Both sides start off with few resources and weak units. Over time they build up in both areas, and the middle/late game are very different than the early game.

I’ll keep looking for other things to respond to in this thread. Thanks for all the feedback/ideas guys.

you already have a leveling system in place. you can start out everyone on the moba map at level 1, and allow leveling up via creep/player kills. gain some sort of temporary currency to buy perhaps stat bonuses, or sigil/rune effects, or new skills entirely. you can have the equivalent of towers be level 20/40/60/80 NPC’s, which means you can’t ‘tower dive’ at level 1, i can go on and on.

point is, theres alot of mechanics already in gw2 that would lend itself well to some sort of moba game mode.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ 2on2/3on3: A lot of you guys really seem to like this idea. So do we. We’re looking at game types which encourage this style of play. Another thing we’re looking at it combining the size of fights with larger tactical/strategic implications, so that there is something fun going on the micro level (the actual fight) and the macro level (the map overall).

@ Moba: This plays into another idea you guys seem to be hitting on, which is a moba style game. We think the layout/flow of a moba style map could be really fun, especially when combined with something like killing enemy captains or guild lords. We’re also looking at testing something like that!

@ GvG/castle sieges: I think these can be combined in some pretty cool ways. You guys had some great points/ideas on these, so thanks for those.

@ Lords and protecting them/not protecting them: Players seem to be pretty split down the middle on this one. Some players want the “play” of protecting their Lord and keeping it alive, while other want it to be more like a MOBA nexxus – something you can’t actively heal/protect. We’ll have to try that one both ways to see what has better play to it. I suspect it’s the former.

@ Not having RPG elements in our game when compared to most MOBAS: Keep this in mind. It’s what gives the mobas their flow/pace. We need to build mechanics that change the pacing/feel of the map in a similar way, without hampering the fun players have. I think you get the same thing out of an RTS, but in a different way. Both sides start off with few resources and weak units. Over time they build up in both areas, and the middle/late game are very different than the early game.

I’ll keep looking for other things to respond to in this thread. Thanks for all the feedback/ideas guys.

Hi Jonathan,

I’ve seen a lot of talk about 2v2, 3v3 and I really think this game isn’t designed for that. Sometimes the customer really doesn’t know what they are asking for and you need to tell us when that’s the case.

2v2 and 3v3 will end up being a giant mess if the pvp isn’t completely overhauled.

if guild wars 2 wants to have a MOBA game mode, it can do without the “MOBA leveling system”. or a separate special MOBA leveling system just for that map / game mode.

for example,
- personal character level is still level 80. with 70 trait points and all etc.
- everyone starts off with “GW2 MOBA level” one (1)
- kill NPCs, creeps, players to “earn exp” to level up “GW2 MOBA level”
- total 10 or 25 “GW2 MOBA levels”
- choose general or profession specific abilities upon “GW2 MOBA level” up
- 3 lanes for 5 vs 5 arena games.
- maybe more lanes for 10 vs 10 hotjoin games.
- strong towers at choke points

all abilities have multiple tiers to level up.
maybe 5 levels. i.e. can take “more health” 5 times.
if total level is 25, then only 5 abilities can be maxed.
so many choices etc.

general abilities:
- more health
- more armor
- more damage against creeps / NPCs
- more damage against players
- more damage against towers
- more damage against creeps / NPCs and players and towers
- more default movement speed
- etc

warrior abilities:
- shouts recharge time decrease (- 10% per level)
- physical skills recharge time decrease (- 10% per level)
- physical skills extra damage (+ 20% per level)
- friendly creeps do more damage (+ 20% per level)
- rampage elite skill recharge time decrease (- 10% per level)
- etc

mesmer abilities:
- shatter skills recharge time decrease (- 10% per level)
- illusions (clones & phantasm) health increase (+ 20% per level)
- illusions damage increase (+ 20% per level)
- friendly creeps have chance to spawn illusions
- etc

necro abilities:
- condition damage increase (+ 20% per level)
- condition duration increase (+ 20% per level)
- minions health increase (+ 20% per level)
- minions damage increase (+ 20% per level)
- friendly creeps do extra condition damage
- etc

thief abilities:
- critical chance increase (+ 10% per level)
- critical damage increase (+ 20% per level)
- stealth duration increase (+ 1s per level)
- revealed duration decrease (-0.5s, -1s, -1.5s, -2s, -2.5s i.e. 1.5 second revealed duration at level 5)
- initiative gain increase (+ 1 initiative per 10s per level)
- friendly creeps has increased critical chance and damage
- etc

engineer abilities:
- turret health increase
- turret damage increase
- etc

elementalist abilities:
- various recharge time decrease
- etc

guardian abilities:
- boon duration increase
- various recharge time decrease
- creeps gets increased health regeneration
- etc

well, everyone get more abilities to choose from.
but you get the idea, right?

@ Not having RPG elements in our game when compared to most MOBAS: Keep this in mind. It’s what gives the mobas their flow/pace. We need to build mechanics that change the pacing/feel of the map in a similar way, without hampering the fun players have. I think you get the same thing out of an RTS, but in a different way. Both sides start off with few resources and weak units. Over time they build up in both areas, and the middle/late game are very different than the early game.

I don’t play MOBAs, so maybe this makes no sense, but if the goal is to add character growth to the experience, would it be possible to add that using mostly existing mechanisms? What I’m thinking is, let players set up their builds, with whatever powers they want on 7, 8, 9, and 0. But then when they load into the map, lock all those abilities out, so they’re stuck with just weapons and heals. Then, when they do something to be rewarded, it unlocks the 7 ability, then the 8, then 9 and finally 0, putting them at full strength. It would certainly add an element of strategy planning out what order you want abilities to unlock in.

Ohoni.6057:

@ Not having RPG elements in our game when compared to most MOBAS: Keep this in mind. It’s what gives the mobas their flow/pace. We need to build mechanics that change the pacing/feel of the map in a similar way, without hampering the fun players have. I think you get the same thing out of an RTS, but in a different way. Both sides start off with few resources and weak units. Over time they build up in both areas, and the middle/late game are very different than the early game.

I don’t play MOBAs, so maybe this makes no sense, but if the goal is to add character growth to the experience, would it be possible to add that using mostly existing mechanisms? What I’m thinking is, let players set up their builds, with whatever powers they want on 7, 8, 9, and 0. But then when they load into the map, lock all those abilities out, so they’re stuck with just weapons and heals. Then, when they do something to be rewarded, it unlocks the 7 ability, then the 8, then 9 and finally 0, putting them at full strength. It would certainly add an element of strategy planning out what order you want abilities to unlock in.

hmmm i dun like the idea of locking skills though.

a guild wars 2 MOBA does not have to behave like any other traditional MOBA. as in the skills unlock mechanics.

i think people just want the mechanics of fighting along friendly creeps, taking down towers etc.

as for “growing powerful” refer to my post above yours.
there could be generic abilities and profession specific abilities to feel stronger.

So a few things on CTF:

We found that CTF works best as a “push” the flag, not “cap it by bringing it back to my base”. This means you have to push through the enemy team, and since you need to push it into their spawn, it means they can more easily defend a cap.

If it’s “cap” it by bringing it back to your base, there are often cases where the capturing team gets a flag past a certain point on the field, and no one on the defending team can catch up with them in order to prevent the cap.

We tried various mechanics, like making it so that the flag carrier couldn’t use skills, or they had to use “flag” skills, or they were just slowed down greatly, but in most of those instances, players didn’t have as much fun when carrying a flag. You can see some of this carried over to Spirit Watch and some of the issues it has.

Just some things to think about.

So there are two solutions to this. Either:

A: Shortcuts. If it’s relatively easy for non-flag holders to move across the map, then even areas right outside the enemy base are not safe zones. The defending team could easily ambush an unwary flag carrier. It might even be a good idea to make it so that the shortcuts only unlock while your flag is on the move, so that it’s no help in capturing, only in recovery.

B: 50 yard victory. If you find it impossible to keep the battle interesting past the 50 yard line, then make the 50 yard line the goal. Make it so you have to enter your enemy’s base and leave it with the flag, but instead of having to reach your base, you just have to reach the point at which it’s determined to be no longer any fun, and the you win. Maybe structure the map to be two bases with a temple in the middle, and the goal is to grab the flag and run it to that center point (kind of like the Winter CTF event, only in reverse).

i dont like the idea to make an EXACT copy from a moba game

first the idea to bring something like a moba game i love – but dont make a LoL copy

some ideas:
for the gear up/lvl problem
- just give players magictokens they can use at spawn to start different events
events to spawn mobs which go to the lanes and build some defense or attack or give buffs or … all this things

and this mobs have hardcountermobs so both teams can with good strategic play counter the enemy – but all this mobs can be killed by players too

and so can fight till enemy “nexus”

atleast it would more fit in an game like gw2

but at the end it dont sounds liek something for strutured pvp – its more like an activitie^^

What about this:
You take the legacy of the foefire map and make the following changes:
-The map does not have any point limit, just time limit
-The lord is invulnerable or maybe even isn’t there unless you control the three points
-The team that kills the lord wins, if no lord is killed when the time ends, the team with the most points wins (points could be awarded as usual, or maybe give points for each % of life you manage to down the lord and/or just give points only when you control the three capture points).

Sorry if someone has already mentioned this, haven’t read the hole post

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ 2on2/3on3: A lot of you guys really seem to like this idea. So do we. We’re looking at game types which encourage this style of play. Another thing we’re looking at it combining the size of fights with larger tactical/strategic implications, so that there is something fun going on the micro level (the actual fight) and the macro level (the map overall).

@ Moba: This plays into another idea you guys seem to be hitting on, which is a moba style game. We think the layout/flow of a moba style map could be really fun, especially when combined with something like killing enemy captains or guild lords. We’re also looking at testing something like that!

@ GvG/castle sieges: I think these can be combined in some pretty cool ways. You guys had some great points/ideas on these, so thanks for those.

@ Lords and protecting them/not protecting them: Players seem to be pretty split down the middle on this one. Some players want the “play” of protecting their Lord and keeping it alive, while other want it to be more like a MOBA nexxus – something you can’t actively heal/protect. We’ll have to try that one both ways to see what has better play to it. I suspect it’s the former.

@ Not having RPG elements in our game when compared to most MOBAS: Keep this in mind. It’s what gives the mobas their flow/pace. We need to build mechanics that change the pacing/feel of the map in a similar way, without hampering the fun players have. I think you get the same thing out of an RTS, but in a different way. Both sides start off with few resources and weak units. Over time they build up in both areas, and the middle/late game are very different than the early game.

I’ll keep looking for other things to respond to in this thread. Thanks for all the feedback/ideas guys.

Wow, great to hear that you are considering this stuff!

Couple of questions to devs/community:

1) 2v2/3vs3 naturally sound awesome, but why is there little interest in a 1vs1 tourney? Imagine the size of the kitten to be had if you could prove you are the best duellist in GW2??!!

2) I hear you on the rpg elements in mobas, that is one of the key elements that make mobas so popular. Is there not some way to work this in within the current structures in GW2?

For example, as I think may have been mentioned, starting with just one skill and a heal and then unlocking the rest of the skill bar as you gained resources/xp from killing mobs/players? Buying food buffs? You could also earn trait points I guess, but it might be a bit complicated. I’m trying to think how you could incorporate buying runes/amulets but as they are so strong I can’t see how it could be done atm, any ideas?

I don’t think actual “levelling” is necessary if you take this approach since players would still be getting notably more powerful throughout the game.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Jayce.5632:

Capture The Flag

Win Conditions:

• Capture 7/7 Enemy Flags (Includes 1 Hard Flag or flag located closest to spawn )
• Most Flags Captured When Timer Expires
• Most Flags Saved > Capture Draw
• Most Kills > Save Draw > Capture Draw

p.s. Map terrain and thoughtful flag placement makes all the difference. Can provide more details to the above if necessary.

So a few things on CTF:

We found that CTF works best as a “push” the flag, not “cap it by bringing it back to my base”. This means you have to push through the enemy team, and since you need to push it into their spawn, it means they can more easily defend a cap.

If it’s “cap” it by bringing it back to your base, there are often cases where the capturing team gets a flag past a certain point on the field, and no one on the defending team can catch up with them in order to prevent the cap.

We tried various mechanics, like making it so that the flag carrier couldn’t use skills, or they had to use “flag” skills, or they were just slowed down greatly, but in most of those instances, players didn’t have as much fun when carrying a flag. You can see some of this carried over to Spirit Watch and some of the issues it has.

Just some things to think about.

Then, why don’t a Capture the HAMMER?
The game mode could work similiar to the cliffside fractal where the hammer have his own skillset and some drawbacks:

-damage when picked up
-stacks of “corruption” just like the cliffside one with the
and/or
-new mechanics, for example a speed modifier based on the stacks of “corruption”

If you keep the corruption mechanic (or make something similiar) you will force team to cooperate due the nature of the drawbacks of the hammer and will help the enemy team to catch up and make a comeback.

Instead of cap you can place some objective to destroy with the hammer (sigils on a colossus or chains that hold him, totems, searing cauldron and so on) with the weapon that “teleport” after a objective destruction.
Remember that no one force you to make the targets all near/far from the team spawn point.

CTF variant idea using uniquely GW2-style powerups: special artefact weapons that grant the wielder the usual skills for that weapon but with a twist, eg:

• a greatsword that grants +20% regular dmg for 5sec on taking damage
• a longbow that grants a burst of +50% speed every 10sec
• a staff with a heal aura and converts a condition->boon every 10sec
• a dagger that randomly procs 2sec stealth and smoke fields
  and so on. Lots of potential ideas here.

Only classes that can natively use a given weapon can pick it up, eg: GS -> warrior/guardian/mesmer/ranger, dagger -> ele/necro/thief/ranger.

Game type I am thinking of is a CTF/moba hybrid in which 4 of these artefact weapons (randomly selected) are set around the map, protected and wielded by mobs (pacing). Players have to bring 3 of these weapons to a (largeish) central area to score a point. Being killed with an artefact weapon drops the weapon to be picked up by any class that can wield that weapon, or the weapon respawns elsewhere if not picked up within 10sec.

Players spawn in an armoury and can freely select & switch weapons prior to leaving spawn. To pick up an artefact weapon, players must be wielding the same kind of weapon.

Just an idea.

Capture The Orb

Pretty much like common CTF with a couple of variations from Spirit Watch and other games. I believe this mode might suit GW2 better than traditional CTF.

Objective

Two teams are matched up against each other. Bring all orbs to your base. The first team to get all x orbs to their base on their altars wins the round. If the time limit is reached and no team has all orbs the team with the most orbs secured in the base wins.

At start x orbs appear on their altars at 1 known(or x known) location on map within certain short intervals.

About the gameplay

To lift an orb from its altar you have to commune with it like in Sprit watch and you can be interrupted while doing so. Your base has x similair altars where you need to carry and place orbs. Orbs can be stolen pretty much the same way as in traditional CTF and same roles apply to this game mode.

When carrying an orb same rules apply as in Spirit Watch: ‘Movement speed decreased by 40%. Prevents stealth and swiftness. Carriers drop the orb if teleportation or invulnerability abilities are used’ maybe add some other abilities to this list as well.

When lifted from her altar every orb has its own various passive AOE effect which scales depending on the distance to the orb.The effects I wrote are just examples, modified effects from other games. The meaning of these effects is to make carrying an orb a slow and demanding task that requires cooperation between players. Dropping an orb should not cause it to reset as in Spirit Watch. A skillful team could use the effects of the orbs to their advantage.

Orb effects

e.g. (again these effects would be short range AOE effects while orb is not placed on her altar, holder or whatever you want to call it)

- Orb of Torment causes aoe torment and cripple on all nearby players, dmg increases the closer you get.

- Orb of Stun produces a well animated stunning aoe pulse at random intervals which stuns all players struck for a period of time which scales depending on the distance to the orb.

- Orb of Earthquake produces a well animated earthquake at random intervals severely slowing down all players and randomly knocking down some unlucky ones.

- Orb of Confusia Channels a part of all combat damage dealt within an area and inflict it on the closest players. So basically fastest to carry but if e.g. an enemy roamer attacks your team carrying this orb don’t stand nearest to this orb but rather drop it and get your team out of its range.

Middle spawn

A Game mode like this should have some kind of capturable spawn in the middle between bases that draws the biggest fights. Whoever holds this would gain an advantage on map control but looses players on other important roles such as base defending, orb carrying, roaming etc.

Overtime

Game goes on a x mins overtime when a player lifts the orb from an enemy altar when less than a minute game time left.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ 2on2/3on3: A lot of you guys really seem to like this idea. So do we. We’re looking at game types which encourage this style of play. Another thing we’re looking at it combining the size of fights with larger tactical/strategic implications, so that there is something fun going on the micro level (the actual fight) and the macro level (the map overall).

As long as we can have legit, fair fights where your actual combat skills and cooperation (support, combo finishers) is all that matters. No pesky 3v2 or 3v1 fights that mostly ends up with either someone fleeing or as mentioned, one side outnumbering the other (conquest)

Got really thrilled about your post btw. Lots of kudos!

Phadde.7362:

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ 2on2/3on3: A lot of you guys really seem to like this idea. So do we. We’re looking at game types which encourage this style of play. Another thing we’re looking at it combining the size of fights with larger tactical/strategic implications, so that there is something fun going on the micro level (the actual fight) and the macro level (the map overall).

As long as we can have legit, fair fights where your actual combat skills and cooperation (support, combo finishers) is all that matters. No pesky 3v2 or 3v1 fights that mostly ends up with either someone fleeing or as mentioned, one side outnumbering the other (conquest)

Got really thrilled about your post btw. Lots of kudos!

Don’t get thrilled. The odds we just get some straight 2v2 and 3v3 arenas is just ridiculously unlikely.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@

@ Moba: This plays into another idea you guys seem to be hitting on, which is a moba style game. We think the layout/flow of a moba style map could be really fun, especially when combined with something like killing enemy captains or guild lords. We’re also looking at testing something like that!

We had a MOBA-like game map during Halloween 2012 (which sadly didn’t make it back in this year). CAn’t you use that and evolve on it, for a game type?

Reaper’s Rumble

JonathanSharp.7094:

So a few things on CTF:

We found that CTF works best as a “push” the flag, not “cap it by bringing it back to my base”. This means you have to push through the enemy team, and since you need to push it into their spawn, it means they can more easily defend a cap.

If it’s “cap” it by bringing it back to your base, there are often cases where the capturing team gets a flag past a certain point on the field, and no one on the defending team can catch up with them in order to prevent the cap.

We tried various mechanics, like making it so that the flag carrier couldn’t use skills, or they had to use “flag” skills, or they were just slowed down greatly, but in most of those instances, players didn’t have as much fun when carrying a flag. You can see some of this carried over to Spirit Watch and some of the issues it has.

Just some things to think about.

Here’s my take on it:

1. The “push” strategy still exists in the “cap” playstyle. This depends on how you’re planning to execute the idea, but if you make it so that there exists two flags, one for each team, and have each flag spawn at each base, then players would have to “push” into enemy territory and fight their defenders to cap it, before running back to base.

2. Fighting an entire team while you have a flag is not very fun. At least, that’s my observations on Spirit Watch. As an elementalist, I hate the idea that suddenly every single opposing players wants to target me and only me, and I’m sure the same applies to other squishy professions. So it’s important that there are incentives to make players spread.

3. Unreal Tournament has the best solution for all of it, in my opinion. Someone already talked about it. In UT, you need to “push” through their base to get their flag, take it back to your own base, but you will only be able to score if your flag is uncaptured and at its original position.

4. Such game rules would contribute positively to the game mode:
- It would force teams to spread (some players to defend, others to “push and run back”);
- It would make leaps/ RTL/ invulnerabilities/ stealth valid tools for flag running, instead of cheap tools that need to be forbidden or crippled as it is in Spirit Watch. This is because that, even if you overload your build with self-defenses, and successfully push through their base, steal their flag, and run back, you won’t still be able to score until the opponent who has your team’s flag is killed. And chances are, that guy has also plenty of stealth/ RTL/ invulnerability/ etc.

This could potentially create plenty of build variety:
- Bunker roamers to steal their flag, run back and defend it until they can score.
- Glass Cannon/ cc defenders who can burst down bunker roamers and prevent them from getting the flag, or kill them fast once they do so and before they escape.
- Glass Cannon roamers who would chase or scout hidden flag carriers waiting for their opportuntiy to score, and kill them as fast as possible, at least before the flag carrier from own team is killed.
- Party support/ cc builds who would support the flag carrier.

I really don’t see why you guys at Anet are overthinking this that much. Just give the people more options for their Custom Arenas (Disable Nodes for Deathmatch, an Orb to carry around for ctf, etc.) and let them see what self-made modes are the most fun. Those ones that are good could be adepted as official modes.
I see over 300 Posts here. Those ideas aren’t new, they have been communicated again and again and again. Its been over one year since the launch of the game.
Stop discussing, start doing.

I really think 2vs2 and 3vs3 need to be a pure DM mode, no other elements or secondary objectives.

BTW i’d start to add new options in custom arena like disable capture points and select a portion of a map. It’s the perfect place to “beta test” this mode, if people appreciate this, you can add a mmr/leaderboard and make it like official game mode.

When you introduced something in this game like leaderboard, mmr, custom arena, spectator mode etc. you said “hey guys don’t worry, it’s not definitive, we can improve this in the future” but look that, these implementations are now in the same release status.

So another important step you need to improve is to implement stuff that works correctly and only after move on, when you are sure everything work fine.

Hi Jonathan,

I agree 100% regarding CTF. Push is far superior than pull. Rift had a CTF map and I had repeated to them that they needed to change the format from capture the flag to push the flag.

The analogy I used is this: how much fun would it be if, in football, the ball was snapped to the quarterback and he ran away from the line of scrimmage to score?

Deimos Tel Arin.7391:

team fortress is doing very well with so many different game modes.
guild wars 2 sPvP should not be afraid to try out different game modes.

The problem they are running into is that they PvP they made works TERRIBLY with most conventional game modes.
So yeah, they have to be really inventive (and stop making consistently worse, and worse, maps while doing that, raid on capricorn -> spirit watch -> skyhammer)

The PvP just seems to need a number of tweaks before it actually can ever be popular anyway it’s played.

Anyways, then, then things like capture the flag and deathmatch could work, and work WONDERFULLY.
The game just hits too many snags with anything but scattered skirmishes… it limits gameplay to 2v2s or conquest or bust.
Which sucks.

Yasha.5963:

Jelger.6758:

Many tPvP players will understand that KotH with one capture point in the middle of the map would be a lot like Legacy of the Foefire without keep and side nodes.
Keep vs keep will be Legacy of the Foefire without the nodes and with added NPC’s and WvW elements.
MOBA will be like Legacy of the Foefire with added NPC’s and towers.
CTF will be similar to Spirit watch but without the nodes.

Most of these suggested modes are switching the main and secondary mechanics of conquest around. All these ‘modes’ could work and be lot’s of fun - but don’t expect them to change the entire play experience. That said, they will be a great improvement to the current sPvP scene. Generally speaking I wouldn’t expect these modes to draw large numbers of new players to GW2. They would cater to different groups within the PvE and WvW communities, which could potentially turn them into sPvP regulars. But this would mostly come from the renewed communication and labels (New CTF mode available! vs New conquest map: Spirit watch) than because of an intrinsically different sPvP experience.

Well, playing a MOBA doesn’t feel anything like the current game mode in gw2 so I think you are overgeneralizing, kind of like saying brussel sprouts are the same as roast chicken because they are both food. Same for CtF, although that might be somewhat closer.

Its an interesting point though. What are the primary differences between the current gw2 game mode and other game types like MOBA? What makes the MOBA set up incredibly popular and so much fun to play?

I would say the scoring system and game progression are fundamentally different.

In mobas there is a “real” sense of progress, in terms of both character power and territory “captured”. GW2 is very abstract in a way. You take these kind of meaningless circles and build points, get enough points and win.

Mobas and are not based on a “score” but on an actual objective (kill lord/destroy base), and progress toward the goal is measured in tangible terms such as towers destroyed, npc/player upgrades etc.

The player progress is also key, I think. It gives the exciting element of levelling-up and gearing-up that we have in pve while providing a totally level playing field for pvp, all in one 30-40 min game sitting.

I think there is room to really push the bounds of the established thinking of what a “battle-ground” is in mmos. GW2 is set up like a moba in some ways-limited skill set, level playing field, can start pvping straight away; but the current game mode is locked into the mmo mindset imo.

Hey Yasha, I certainly didn’t mean to overgeneralize, but my point certainly wasn’t to insinuate that playing a MOBA and Conquest feel the same. I wanted to point out that there are several elements that are quite similar. Take for example the roles, while being far less obvious in conquest, there are plenty of similarities between the roles in both games.

I wholly agree with you on the subject of the game progression being fundamentally different. The sense of progress that you speak of is indeed psychologically enticing. And perhaps feels better than the points and nodes currently captured in conquest. But it’s exactly these mechanics that allow for easier comebacks and a fairer sense of play.

I think the deciding difference between MOBA’s and Conquest is the level of understanding. In both games it’s hard to find out what works and what doesn’t. But in a MOBA the general goal and task of everyone is far more obvious. It’s really hard for players in GW2 to get meaningful feedback of what they’re doing right and wrong. I strongly suspect that most players genuinely don’t know that it’s stupid to move and capture nodes in a group. It’s also far harder to tell your teammates what the best course of action is, or to communicate anything tbh. I feel that the sPvP scene in general could be improved greatly by relatively small additions like player tips and easier communication.

If a moba in gw2 was going to happen, I’d like a jungle similar to LoL, neutral npcs with buffs. I like the dynamic of having someone roam and causing plays on lanes. This would be great for thiefs, eles, mesmers. I love this idea though, I think a moba in gw2 could be really fun. Instead of going ap or ad, characters can go condi/power.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Jayce.5632:

Capture The Flag

Win Conditions:

• Capture 7/7 Enemy Flags (Includes 1 Hard Flag or flag located closest to spawn )
• Most Flags Captured When Timer Expires
• Most Flags Saved > Capture Draw
• Most Kills > Save Draw > Capture Draw

p.s. Map terrain and thoughtful flag placement makes all the difference. Can provide more details to the above if necessary.

So a few things on CTF:

We found that CTF works best as a “push” the flag, not “cap it by bringing it back to my base”. This means you have to push through the enemy team, and since you need to push it into their spawn, it means they can more easily defend a cap.

If it’s “cap” it by bringing it back to your base, there are often cases where the capturing team gets a flag past a certain point on the field, and no one on the defending team can catch up with them in order to prevent the cap.

We tried various mechanics, like making it so that the flag carrier couldn’t use skills, or they had to use “flag” skills, or they were just slowed down greatly, but in most of those instances, players didn’t have as much fun when carrying a flag. You can see some of this carried over to Spirit Watch and some of the issues it has.

Just some things to think about.

I don’t generally like PvP, but Capture the Flag actually sounds like a game mode I might participate in.

It seems to me that the mechanics of Lunatic Inquisition could be adapted and re-skinned to create a hide-and-seek version of capture the flag. I realize many people don’t like LI, but please hear me out (I didn’t like it at all at first, but it’s grown on me, despite the imbalances).

For example:

• With capture the flag, it makes sense for the available skills to favor the team trying to recapture the flag. Lunatic Inquisition is already balanced in favor of the Lunatic Court.
• The team holding the flag acts as the villagers, and the team chasing it acts as the Court. When the flag switches sides, so do the skills.
• When a team member is defeated on either side, they are sent back to a spawn point (middle for the Court, one of the four corners for the villagers, again dependent on which team has the flag).
• The flag-bearer’s skills could be treated similarly to the blunderbuss, with a limited number of charges per skill, but with a strategic way to recharge them.
• A labyrinthine map is ideal for capture the flag.
• Hidden weapons and items would make mechanics interesting, especially if they’re usable by both sides when skills swap.
• An idea you could adapt from Keg Brawl would be a skill that allows teammates to pass the flag within a limited range (keg brawl skill #1, not #2).
• Even Inquisition’s scoring breakdown could be used, except as a team, rather than on an individual basis.

However, I think the following from Lunatic Inquisition would not lend well to the new CTF game mode:

• Mad King Says should not force an item drop, especially the flag.
• The Court #3 skill should not perma-stun (I don’t think this is intended even in the Inquisition game).
• Since people are not switching teams during the match, it would make teamwork easier if both teams could see allied dots on the mini-map.

Just some ideas, but I think you’re already well on your way to a CTF game mode if you borrow from some mechanics you’re already using. I just don’t know if this would lend itself better to an activity or actual sPvP.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ Not having RPG elements in our game when compared to most MOBAS: Keep this in mind. It’s what gives the mobas their flow/pace. We need to build mechanics that change the pacing/feel of the map in a similar way, without hampering the fun players have. I think you get the same thing out of an RTS, but in a different way. Both sides start off with few resources and weak units. Over time they build up in both areas, and the middle/late game are very different than the early game.

I think the MOBA style would be a great fit for guild wars 2 because the game has in fact a superior way to “level up” throughout a match than any existing MOBAs because rather than relying on equipment, the leveling up system can rely largely on how many ability and trait options there are within the existing leveling up system in PVE, just an accelerated/streamlined version of it. It would require some new coding/interfaces but the mechanics would largely be built upon existing making it much easier and easily fit within the existing games’ structure, here is how I think it should work:

- Once the match starts all equipment (with sigil and runes) and would be locked as to what the player has set in the mist. But not heals, utilities or traits.

- All players start at level 5 and continue to level in intervals of 5 levels, so when a players “levels” in this mode he will jump to level 10, then 15 and so forth until 80.

- The stat values on equipment are scaled proportionately to current level, so while the equipment can’t be changed mid game, the chosen stats will keep growing.

- A new interface will need to be designed for trait level up to make this selection easier as the player levels so it can be done quickly on the go and rather than individual points in would be based on selecting minor and major traits. So at the start of the match on the wait area the interface would pop up and allow the players to pick one of the five minor traits. At first level up (lv 10) he could pick either one of the 4 other minor traits or the major trait on the line he selected the minor trait at. If he picks the major trait next level up (lv 15) he can choose one of the 4 first minor traits or the second minor trait in the line he went into and thus forth until he hits level 80.

- Players start with only the first skill of their current weapon of choice and have to unlock the others by killing minions. At first level up he unlocks weapon swap and will again only have the first skill unlocked on his secondary level until he unlocks the rest. He also only starts with one heal and one utility skill, unlocking additional slots for selection as he levels as it would happen in regular pve (though in this mode of course 5 levels are granted at once and it’s much, much faster). So upon gaining the first “level” the player would get a second utility slot and so forth until getting their elite at 30. The key difference here is that while the player can select from any heal/utility/or elite available in game as he unlocks slots he can only do so once. Once each slot is selected from all options it is locked for the rest of the match, this is were the “build” variations to counter the enemy you get in MOBA’s from equipment would come into play as players will get to choose their heal/utility/elite build as they go.

That’s my suggestion for progression, obviously the actual map design is a whole other beast I’ll share my thoughts on it later.

Jamais vu.5284:

GvG
Don’t look far. GW1 already laid down the basic concept perfectly. Run secondary objectives for boons, assault base, kill lord. With the improved engine I’m sure you can handle additional things that would make it even more interesting, like traps or siege weapons (not the same as WvW siege weps).
This should be a sPvP game mode. It’s only associated with WvW right now because there is no real alternative due to team sizes. Regarding that, I think you should use variable team sizes ranging from 5-20, but fixate your tourney GvG team sizes at 8, 12 and/or 15.

No, no no. PvP is way too basic for GvG. The beauty of GvG is a whole group of people, typically 15 or 20, that all have different armor, trinket, food combinations. It adds so much more to the strategy.

The smaller fights are fine for PvP, but for real competitive play, people will use the new OS map in WvW.

JonathanSharp.7094:

@ 2on2/3on3: A lot of you guys really seem to like this idea. So do we. We’re looking at game types which encourage this style of play. Another thing we’re looking at it combining the size of fights with larger tactical/strategic implications, so that there is something fun going on the micro level (the actual fight) and the macro level (the map overall).

I think it should be separated by hot join and custom arenas. In hot join, 5v5 would be a lot more fun. In custom arenas it should vary between 2 and 8 depending on what the person wants to do.

I’d also like to see a 1v1 tournament option. That would be the most interesting leaderboard by far. It would also help you on balancing issues.

I think taking some moba elements is great.

What makes certain games tourney competitive is having a beginning, middle, and end. Mobas are the most successful esports because they clearly separate into laning, midgame, and lategame phases. Sc2 has early game, midgame, 2base, and lategame 4+ tier3 . Marvel vs capcom (most popular fighter) has X-factor.

The frustration with the point system isnt the points, its this lack of progression.

For instance, the only map where i feel some sort of direction and pace is Temple, because there is this time 830 where two teams are forced to fight. This is great!

I would say the easiest way to do this quickly is make Foefire dynamic. Make it so that holding points gives you access to a teleporter, so that you can reach the battle quicker and have a strategic advantage. And make the goal of the map to kill the enemy lord. If you get 400 points the enemys gate opens, and you can target their lord (or if you dont want GL sniping make another capture point guarded by a lord).

Then most importantly, what makes mobas, sc2, and umvc3 exciting is the comeback factor. Have a separate npc that is initially almost invincible, but grows weaker over time. If you go out and snipe it, you get what i think would the coolest buff ever=Your elite has only a 10s recharge, until you die.

Deimos Tel Arin.7391:

Ohoni.6057:

@ Not having RPG elements in our game when compared to most MOBAS: Keep this in mind. It’s what gives the mobas their flow/pace. We need to build mechanics that change the pacing/feel of the map in a similar way, without hampering the fun players have. I think you get the same thing out of an RTS, but in a different way. Both sides start off with few resources and weak units. Over time they build up in both areas, and the middle/late game are very different than the early game.

I don’t play MOBAs, so maybe this makes no sense, but if the goal is to add character growth to the experience, would it be possible to add that using mostly existing mechanisms? What I’m thinking is, let players set up their builds, with whatever powers they want on 7, 8, 9, and 0. But then when they load into the map, lock all those abilities out, so they’re stuck with just weapons and heals. Then, when they do something to be rewarded, it unlocks the 7 ability, then the 8, then 9 and finally 0, putting them at full strength. It would certainly add an element of strategy planning out what order you want abilities to unlock in.

hmmm i dun like the idea of locking skills though.

a guild wars 2 MOBA does not have to behave like any other traditional MOBA. as in the skills unlock mechanics.

i think people just want the mechanics of fighting along friendly creeps, taking down towers etc.

as for “growing powerful” refer to my post above yours.
there could be generic abilities and profession specific abilities to feel stronger.

The reason I don’t play MOBA’s is for this reason. Everyone should have their abilities and there should be no skill/power progression. All advantages gained by a team should come from the environment, e.g. taking down walls and towers, reinforcing them through gaining resources on the map, or making your lord stronger by killing the opposing teams npcs. Gear/skill/level progression will just make a game obscenely long. If people wanted a direct port of Dota or LoL, they should just go play those games. Anet has a chance to evolve the game into something distinct with SOME similarities to other successful games, but it should NOT be a copycat aside from the standard pvp game modes like CTF and TDM. I don’t play MOBA’s because I can’t stand all the mouse clicking, but I want to see a MOBA style map minus the leveling/gear progression. Anet needs to stand by their philosophy of a level playing field for all players.