Guild Wars 2

It’s really funny seeing these threads on the forums throughout the past few months of people arguing about whether or not full team que should be back in the game along with solo q, and honestly even though there should be BOTH a solo q and team que in the game for 5v5. However, at this point in time the answer to bring in more people relies on this simple question.

In a worst case scenario, would you be willing to let conquest die in order to bring back the competitive scene for a smaller game mode like 2v2 or 3v3 deathmatch for example to take its place?

If you answered no then sadly you’re part of the problem.

If guild wars 2 by some miracle would release 2v2 and 3v3 deathmatch, in my opinion would be a huge success and here’s why.

- 2v2 = less players per team = more overall teams with a low population as compared to 5v5

- since there’s more teams overall within the playerbase = less time waiting in que

- 2 people to keep track of instead of 5 makes things much smoother in terms of organizing when to play

- Tournaments can be organized quicker and have a better outcome of having full team rosters every time.

- Shoutcasting a 2v2 or 3v3 tournament is much easier than shoutcasting conquest, as a matter of fact it’s almost impossible to keep track of 3 different viewpoints at once.

- From a viewers perspective watching a 2v2 or 3v3 would be simpler because you can see all the players at once, as opposed to conquest where you are guaranteed to miss something throughout the match because it’s impossible to see all three points at one time, it’s honestly just a clusterf*** to watch.

However, in order for this to work, what I proposed needs to be given every quality of life that conquest has, meaning proper leagues, leaderboards, the whole 9 yards. Also touching base from earlier, I’m not saying that both my proposed new game type and conquest couldn’t coexist, in fact they might even work well together since they are different in every way, in terms of numbers, and purpose. However if it came down to it, what would you rather have, a new game mode that could revitalize the scene if done correctly or having conquest just dragging itself along? Personsally I think they should risk it for the biscuit.

Thanks for reading.

Countless

That doesnt fix anything.

We had 1 vs 1 tournaments, 2 vs 2 tournaments and 3 vs 3. Guess what it doesnt get the same thing. When helseth and sind held a tournament it took 7 hours to cast.

When i was in a team for AG there were full teams week in and out.

2 vs 2 and 3 vs 3 simplify the game, less strategy, a need for less map rotation, among a whole bunch of other things.

Simply put this game was most active when there different types of team comps, different kinds of solo builds and actual tournaments to play in. Things died off when the D/D ele meta started and it hit a brick wall when teams couldnt get into the Pro League.

We can agree on the clutter but this isnt a good proposal.

2v2 and 3v3 ranked qeues sounds so fun.

great points made by OP about the game mode being easier to spectate/casted by the viewers as well as shortening qeues and solving a lot of issues from ranked conquest such as class stacking (unfortunate 2+ thieves in your team), solo q vs team q argument, and disparity of rating in a match because of the system’s faulty endeavor to find 10 people to start a pvp game w.o long qeues from a population that is the current pvp community… Seriously, tfw former advocates of gw2 pvp scene (ppl in leaderboard, proleagues, content producers and streamers, etc) goes around saying that pvp is dead..

Some stuff that comes to mind for the new game mode:

- no respawn, smaller map, and limit to stealth stacking/add reveal mechanic to the match if stealth somehow end up abusive.

-Best out of three matches. if no one dies then team that did more overall damage wins. Allow build change before every match to customize synergy with teammate(s) and counterbuild opponents.

-Instead of a class balance that needs to encompass 5v5 conquest setting (decap, bunkering, rotation mobility, team fight potential, forcing specific builds/profession into certain roles, etc) the meta will revolve around a smaller-scale death match which I think will be easier to balance and at the same time bring more build diversity and less role forcing (eles not having a strong build outside of support).

-It will also be more straightforward to learn and casual-player friendly while still emphasizing deeper understanding of team synergy and combat/class mechanics to be successful. Right now, conquest demands so many elements from new players just starting to engage in ranked pvp. Things like rotations, role, mapawareness, matchup advantage, momentum after a teamfight, etc on top of learning their own profession and combat mechanics to simply hold their own against enemy players. Toxicity also arises because sometimes a more committed player’s rating will be at mercy of their teammates knowing how to play conquest or not.
We will also see less reportings of shady match manipulation and such…

Overall, this will bring healthier profession balance. Less hard-counters and pigeonhole-ing of roles to professions. pvp balance that revolves around conquest and nodes that need to be capped does not consider WvW balance either when it should since its another game mode that involves “pvp”.. (ex: dh gets nerfed because devs thought it was op on a node, meanwhile dh players in wvw suffer the consequences too)

This game has great potential to really show off it’s combat mechanics and build diversity but the current game mode is pulling it’s legs imo…

I don’t get why people would think having 2v2/3v3 would save the game.
Seems I need to repeat myself over and over: game is balanced around 5v5, look at the skills and the traits.

2v2/3v3 would work if it would have it’s own balance-team, which is not going to happen as Anet already has enough work for the 5v5 in Conquest.

I’m totally up for 2v2/3v3 but I’m being realistic, knowing alot of top-notch devs already left Anet, it’s either not coming or it’s coming with lots of balance-issues due skills/traits being balanced for 5 targets/allies.

I support 2:2 and 3:3 game modes. The key is easy access so the button in the mists to Q for it (if you have a fitting team so grouped 2 or 3). The thing of this might be the size of the playerbase and a resulting split but not shure. I would try it. A two point arena with maybe 300 not 500 Points for the win where its fought out.

Wolfric.9380:

I support 2:2 and 3:3 game modes. The key is easy access so the button in the mists to Q for it (if you have a fitting team so grouped 2 or 3). The thing of this might be the size of the playerbase and a resulting split but not shure. I would try it. A two point arena with maybe 300 not 500 Points for the win where its fought out.

well, the 3 vs 3 modes could still use existing 3 point conquest maps.

then everyone can finally enjoy their 1 vs 1 on each points.

I agree a map like foefire or capricorn might work for 3:3 maybe skyhammer too.

Terrorsquad.2349:

I don’t get why people would think having 2v2/3v3 would save the game.
Seems I need to repeat myself over and over: game is balanced around 5v5, look at the skills and the traits.

2v2/3v3 would work if it would have it’s own balance-team, which is not going to happen as Anet already has enough work for the 5v5 in Conquest.

I’m totally up for 2v2/3v3 but I’m being realistic, knowing alot of top-notch devs already left Anet, it’s either not coming or it’s coming with lots of balance-issues due skills/traits being balanced for 5 targets/allies.

Not sure what you mean by "skills/traits being balanced for 5 targets/allies.. A skill being able to target up to 5 targets doesn’t make it unusable in a 2v2/3v3.

“Game is balanced around 5v5, look at the traits/skills.”
Almost every profession can be customized for a 2v2/3v3 matchup w/o a node, you just don’t see these different builds because meta is around 5v5 conquest which kind of forces 1-2 builds per profession, kind of sad when you think about the limitation it imposes on us to be competitive. If a deathmatch ranked is introduced, you can be tailoring your build depending on what your teammates are playing to promote synergy while considering the opponents/matchup at the same time.

They would have to re-balance everything, but I’d love to see this done. At the very least it would get more viewership from outsiders, and the general GW2 population by virtue of being easier to consume.

Really should have a PTR or something so things like this could be tested publicly.

tomwjd.8172:

Terrorsquad.2349:

I don’t get why people would think having 2v2/3v3 would save the game.
Seems I need to repeat myself over and over: game is balanced around 5v5, look at the skills and the traits.

2v2/3v3 would work if it would have it’s own balance-team, which is not going to happen as Anet already has enough work for the 5v5 in Conquest.

I’m totally up for 2v2/3v3 but I’m being realistic, knowing alot of top-notch devs already left Anet, it’s either not coming or it’s coming with lots of balance-issues due skills/traits being balanced for 5 targets/allies.

Not sure what you mean by "skills/traits being balanced for 5 targets/allies.. A skill being able to target up to 5 targets doesn’t make it unusable in a 2v2/3v3.

“Game is balanced around 5v5, look at the traits/skills.”
Almost every profession can be customized for a 2v2/3v3 matchup w/o a node, you just don’t see these different builds because meta is around 5v5 conquest which kind of forces 1-2 builds per profession, kind of sad when you think about the limitation it imposes on us to be competitive. If a deathmatch ranked is introduced, you can be tailoring your build depending on what your teammates are playing to promote synergy while considering the opponents/matchup at the same time.

Not hard to understand: a skill able to hit up to 5 allies/targets is not meant to be as strong meant for 2 or 3 targets, so that’s already a balance-issue.

Certain builds right now in Conquest cannot be defeated in a 2v2 with Druid, like Necro/Druid in Conquest is one of the strongest setup together.

Let me give you an example based on current 5v5 balance in a 2v2 match:

• Team A: Thief and Thief
• Team B: Druid and DH

Who wins with the current balance of Conquest? Do you see the problem?
2v2 and 3v3 will need it’s own balance-team since Anet does not want matchmaking based on classes (for example getting 2 Thieves on a team) so you’ll most likely get a Thief and Thief comp vs OP comp.

They’ll have to make every class + every class work vs every class + every class.

2:2 might be already to low but 3:3 can be great even if some teamcompositions won´t be optimal. And for the above example the two thiefs might kill the druid fast i assume that two P/P thiefs with basi venom win this … So we might see diffrent builds which would be good.

Terrorsquad.2349:

Not hard to understand: a skill able to hit up to 5 allies/targets is not meant to be as strong meant for 2 or 3 targets, so that’s already a balance-issue.

Certain builds right now in Conquest cannot be defeated in a 2v2 with Druid, like Necro/Druid in Conquest is one of the strongest setup together.

Let me give you an example based on current 5v5 balance in a 2v2 match:

• Team A: Thief and Thief
• Team B: Druid and DH

Who wins with the current balance of Conquest? Do you see the problem?
2v2 and 3v3 will need it’s own balance-team since Anet does not want matchmaking based on classes (for example getting 2 Thieves on a team) so you’ll most likely get a Thief and Thief comp vs OP comp.

They’ll have to make every class + every class work vs every class + every class.

“Not hard to understand: a skill able to hit up to 5 allies/targets is not meant to be as strong meant for 2 or 3 targets, so that’s already a balance-issue.”

-Give me specifics since most team fights you see in conquest are 2v2, 3v3, or uneven matchup of sorts anyway.. 5v5 can happen (fighting for a cap at a crucial moment) but is rare since that leaves two caps in the map uncontested which calls for some plays, so actual 5v5 doesn’t even last very long to even call it a 5v5. With that said, the skills that the current meta builds run seems to be balanced around smaller fights anyway.

“Certain builds right now in Conquest cannot be defeated in a 2v2 with Druid, like Necro/Druid in Conquest is one of the strongest setup together.”

-I can already think of different profession combinations/builds that will be able to beat the druid+necro duo in a 2v2. An example: Thief+rev on non-traditional “meta” builds.
Saying these kind of things as if they are factual statements that will ALSO apply in a 2v2 deathmatch w/o a node shows how narrow-minded some people in the community have become when it comes to builds and pvp.

“Let me give you an example based on current 5v5 balance in a 2v2 match:”

• Team A: Thief and Thief
• Team B: Druid and DH

-In conquest, Team B will most likely win (force the thieves to disengage or die and win the node) Yet, in a 2v2 matchup w/o a node, you’ll be surprised to see how effective thieves can be customized to do actual team fighting.
If 2v2/3v3 is introduced, Anet should tailor their ranked matchmaking to avoid class-stacking anyway to mimic proleague rules, not to mention its so much easier to do w/o making the queue times too long in a smaller game. The issue that arises from getting rid of class-stacking in matchmaking right now is that it would make the queue times too long with the given playerbase. We already have to deal with the disparity of ratings in a team to have faster queue times, which would probably be alleviated naturally if 2v2/3v3s ranked were implemented.

“They’ll have to make every class + every class work vs every class + every class”

-More like they will do class balance so that a profession does not completely rely on another role to be “viable.”
Examples:
-Necro relying on a competent support to become an actual threat.
-Ele having only one strong role which still relies on another role to make a strong impact in a game.

What you describe of “balance so that every duo is strong vs every duo” sounds great anyway, why shouldn’t anet have a goal in terms of pvp profession-balance??
Do you think that every ele player in the community are happy to have only one strong role in pvp and deserve bashing by his/her teammates if they are running something other than the meta build?
How about the necro-mains who wants to solo q or dare I say,, solo-roam in wvw

This isn’t even a bandaid approach in fixing the many problems with pvp in its current state.

GW2 pvp is in maintenance mode. They had two new game modes to pvp which had more complaints than positive reviews – courtyard and stronghold.

You’re not necessarily going to see build diversity if they don’t address the traits. Otherwise people will use whichever setup is the strongest for that game type.

I don’t quite understand how tournaments will be organized quicker with a 2v2 or 3v3 roster. Maybe it’s just the wording used here?

In any event, there’s a lot wrong with pvp that will not get solved by reducing team sizes and going to a conquer mode.

Courtyard, (the “death match” style mode,) failed miserably. It failed because it allowed people to be kittens and stomp all over someone.

That’s fun for one side of the equation.. but it drives away the other half. Sadly, the culture in GW2 PvP is largely about exploiting and talking kitten.

To make such a game mode work, you’d need sportsmanship and a sense of fair play.

Dueling works. That’s largely because it’s played with a certain honor. We bow to show respect, or at least to ensure both sides are ready. We do not interfere in another’s match. We do not stomp.

In the larger game , this kind of restrained conduct is mostly non existent. That’s why “death match” style won’t fly.

I’m just going to address some of the arguments given opposed to my idea

“The Courtyard Argument” – The fact that you’re using courtyard as an argument against 2v2 or 3v3 is just sad, here’s why,

Courtyard failed is not because the game wasn’t balanced for it, but because the way the game was structured didn’t allow it to be successful. The two main reasons are the following

- The game/map isn’t round based
- Impatient players

Since courtyard isn’t round based, the winning team is determined by points, and obviously you get points by getting a kill. However the team who wins the match is more than likely determined the moment the first team kills a player of the opposing team that creates a snowball effect for the rest of the game. Part of this is due to not being rounds, and the other part which is players being impatient “prolongs snowball”. So once a single person is dead, the rest will surely follow, creating a handicap of having less numbers because your team is too impatient to wait to group up, instead running in to die because well……. they can. In a casuals eyes who wants to wait when you can get right back in the action, the game type as is essentially encourages it.
The structure of the game needs to eliminate these types of discrepancies as much of possible in order for things to go smoothly, here are my ideas.

Game Type

-Team Death Match 2v2, or 3v3

-Time Limit Per Round 3 minutes

-Best of 5 rounds

-You cannot stack stealth for longer than 10 seconds “see below”

-You cannot break combat “see below”

-If an event occurs that either no players died after each round from either team, the winner of that round will be determined by which team did more damage total.

-If an event occurs that the majority of your team dies but you are able to live until the timer, you still have the potential to win the round if your teams damage total is greater than the opposing team. This makes the match exciting until the very end, giving opportunities to carry, not to mention awesome comebacks despite lacking numbers.

-Obviously killing the entire enemy team wins the round by default
Reasoning

Having rounds ensures that regardless of competitive or casual play, the possibility of someones impatience aka running out as soon as they respawn is reduced to zero.

-Not having stealth and no combat break goes hand and hand. No stealth above ten seconds because it simply isn’t fun to watch, and no combat break for the same reason, but also for the fact that since it translates into health. That type of play style or mentality is not only game breaking, but something that shouldn’t even be considered to determine the outcome of a match. In a competitive game kiting and running away to break combat for the sole purpose of gaining health should never be considered a form of attrition.

Like honestly, you guys lack imagination. It’s not that hard to tailor a gamemode up to be successful. And the best part is that I typed this in another post 7 months ago. If you’re going to come at me with an argument, please come up with something better.

@phokus.8934

Your concern is at least more valid. Sure we can sit here and spew numbers all day of what we would like changed for balance. Hell I’ve even made a specific thread of changes I’d like to see done to mesmer that was an extensive list down to exact number changes on weapons skills, utilities etc in the past. But I can’t make them listen sadly.

Bumping this to advocate for a different start. I see posts highlighting casual players not knowing how to play conquest/rotate/play their role. Plays happening in just the mini-map but its not exciting/fun to see that from a perspective of an avg casual viewer.
We also have terrible matchups on most of our games (from both the perspective of pros and casuals) because of population base.

Lets just opt for a smaller game mode so we can finally fix:
-class stacking
-queue times(to some extent)
-support build diversity in the meta (counter-comping will be more emphasized in 3v3s)
-streams casting fights where more players are in view and plays are more obvious (rotational outplays are sometimes missed to the eyes of a casual)
-Easier balancing for devs
-we can still keep conquest

I must be an oddball among all these 1v1/3v3 etc fans because I always thought GW2 sPvP failed to attract people due to not doing what it does best – group combat. I would rather have seen 8v8-12v12 on larger maps instead.

It’s quite simple really. You can’t have a competitive scene when the skill and class balance rewards using cheap tricks and passive stuff like stacking condi more than skills relying on evades and counter mechanics.

That will just end up ruining the build variety and alienating the best players that didn’t spend thousand of hours practicing just to get beaten by a new player using a metabattle condi build.

The competitive scene dying is the result of absolutely abysmal skill and balance. Something which a lot of us have been warning about… And we offered plenty of solutions to fix it, for years.

When all the roles are set in stone and the outcome doesn’t feel deserved how can a game mode survive competitively?

Dawdler.8521:

I must be an oddball among all these 1v1/3v3 etc fans because I always thought GW2 sPvP failed to attract people due to not doing what it does best – group combat. I would rather have seen 8v8-12v12 on larger maps instead.

8v8? Larger maps? no conquest? shhhh we can’t have anything even remotely similar to GvG round these parts!

GvG is well and good. I think GW1 is awesome.. perhaps better. Still, there simply aren’t enough people to support that.

I shudder to think what would happen when 8 member teams started farming solos.

Ithilwen.1529:

I shudder to think what would happen when 8 member teams started farming solos.

Just add “solo” option, like conquest and stronghold.

So the players could cry about their afker/rager/toxic mates and the others can seek fair matches

I don’t mind having a larger number on the current game mode and existing maps, in terms of rock paper scissor; some profession are made for such scenario’s which require deceptions, element of surprise and awareness.
It’s been supported back then, idk what happen.

I guess I’m “part of the problem” then.

Look, I agree with you. 2v2, 3v3, 4v4 TDM would be great to have. I’m never going to disagree about advocating for new game modes.

However, I’m going to be realistic. How about we fix what we already have first? 5v5 conquest. We need to understand that professions are balanced around 5v5 simply because conquest is all that exists in PvP. There’s nothing else to balance around lol! If we get 5v5 to work, it will be easier to balance around 2v2 and 3v3 down the road. We have a base to build from.

Besides, the primary problem is ELITE SPECS. This is why conquest suffers.

Steady progress, people.

HOT powercreep with elite did a lot of damage. “Kittencluster” and lowerd build diversity did hit exitement … It actually balanced pvp much more but balance doesnt´help when no one plays due to boredom or feeling their contribution has low impact on the outcome. The last thing is the worst part why people give up. And it about what people feel not their actual impact.

Trigr.6481:

It’s really funny seeing these threads on the forums throughout the past few months of people arguing about whether or not full team que should be back in the game along with solo q, and honestly even though there should be BOTH a solo q and team que in the game for 5v5. However, at this point in time the answer to bring in more people relies on this simple question.

In a worst case scenario, would you be willing to let conquest die in order to bring back the competitive scene for a smaller game mode like 2v2 or 3v3 deathmatch for example to take its place?

If you answered no then sadly you’re part of the problem.

If guild wars 2 by some miracle would release 2v2 and 3v3 deathmatch, in my opinion would be a huge success and here’s why.

- 2v2 = less players per team = more overall teams with a low population as compared to 5v5

- since there’s more teams overall within the playerbase = less time waiting in que

- 2 people to keep track of instead of 5 makes things much smoother in terms of organizing when to play

- Tournaments can be organized quicker and have a better outcome of having full team rosters every time.

- Shoutcasting a 2v2 or 3v3 tournament is much easier than shoutcasting conquest, as a matter of fact it’s almost impossible to keep track of 3 different viewpoints at once.

- From a viewers perspective watching a 2v2 or 3v3 would be simpler because you can see all the players at once, as opposed to conquest where you are guaranteed to miss something throughout the match because it’s impossible to see all three points at one time, it’s honestly just a clusterf*** to watch.

However, in order for this to work, what I proposed needs to be given every quality of life that conquest has, meaning proper leagues, leaderboards, the whole 9 yards. Also touching base from earlier, I’m not saying that both my proposed new game type and conquest couldn’t coexist, in fact they might even work well together since they are different in every way, in terms of numbers, and purpose. However if it came down to it, what would you rather have, a new game mode that could revitalize the scene if done correctly or having conquest just dragging itself along? Personsally I think they should risk it for the biscuit.

Thanks for reading.

Countless

Sorry, unfortunately nothing you listed will improve spvp.

This game needs profession revamps, skill improvements, better and more optional roles to play, more elites and skills, better rewards…

Swagger.1459:

Trigr.6481:

It’s really funny seeing these threads on the forums throughout the past few months of people arguing about whether or not full team que should be back in the game along with solo q, and honestly even though there should be BOTH a solo q and team que in the game for 5v5. However, at this point in time the answer to bring in more people relies on this simple question.

In a worst case scenario, would you be willing to let conquest die in order to bring back the competitive scene for a smaller game mode like 2v2 or 3v3 deathmatch for example to take its place?

If you answered no then sadly you’re part of the problem.

If guild wars 2 by some miracle would release 2v2 and 3v3 deathmatch, in my opinion would be a huge success and here’s why.

- 2v2 = less players per team = more overall teams with a low population as compared to 5v5

- since there’s more teams overall within the playerbase = less time waiting in que

- 2 people to keep track of instead of 5 makes things much smoother in terms of organizing when to play

- Tournaments can be organized quicker and have a better outcome of having full team rosters every time.

- Shoutcasting a 2v2 or 3v3 tournament is much easier than shoutcasting conquest, as a matter of fact it’s almost impossible to keep track of 3 different viewpoints at once.

- From a viewers perspective watching a 2v2 or 3v3 would be simpler because you can see all the players at once, as opposed to conquest where you are guaranteed to miss something throughout the match because it’s impossible to see all three points at one time, it’s honestly just a clusterf*** to watch.

However, in order for this to work, what I proposed needs to be given every quality of life that conquest has, meaning proper leagues, leaderboards, the whole 9 yards. Also touching base from earlier, I’m not saying that both my proposed new game type and conquest couldn’t coexist, in fact they might even work well together since they are different in every way, in terms of numbers, and purpose. However if it came down to it, what would you rather have, a new game mode that could revitalize the scene if done correctly or having conquest just dragging itself along? Personsally I think they should risk it for the biscuit.

Thanks for reading.

Countless

Sorry, unfortunately nothing you listed will improve spvp.

This game needs profession revamps, skill improvements, better and more optional roles to play, more elites and skills, better rewards…

If the game was balanced around 2v2s and 3v3s you would probably get most of that except maybe “more optional roles to play” and “more elite and skills” would come with time. But it would be much more appealing for viewership compared to the awful mess of our 5v5 conquest.

Even if you fixed everything you mentioned we’d still have a game that already no one wants to watch that is exclusionary to the uninitiated viewer, and few want to play unless it’s to farm rewards.

i will rather see they get rid of unranked and ranked ,bring back random arena and team arena (both 5v5 conquest) each with their independent leaderboards and weekly and monthly automated tournaments (for team arena).

Let Courtyard and a redesigned Colosseum(no side points ) as a 2v2 3v3 maps .

And turn Stronghold into a 10v10 CTF (without pve elements).

But lets be honest what the game needs is balance ,general mechanics redesigns ,trait reworks ,skills redesigns, proffession mechanics redesigns, the game is stale as a two weeks bread.

Daishi.6027:

Swagger.1459:

Trigr.6481:

It’s really funny seeing these threads on the forums throughout the past few months of people arguing about whether or not full team que should be back in the game along with solo q, and honestly even though there should be BOTH a solo q and team que in the game for 5v5. However, at this point in time the answer to bring in more people relies on this simple question.

In a worst case scenario, would you be willing to let conquest die in order to bring back the competitive scene for a smaller game mode like 2v2 or 3v3 deathmatch for example to take its place?

If you answered no then sadly you’re part of the problem.

If guild wars 2 by some miracle would release 2v2 and 3v3 deathmatch, in my opinion would be a huge success and here’s why.

- 2v2 = less players per team = more overall teams with a low population as compared to 5v5

- since there’s more teams overall within the playerbase = less time waiting in que

- 2 people to keep track of instead of 5 makes things much smoother in terms of organizing when to play

- Tournaments can be organized quicker and have a better outcome of having full team rosters every time.

- Shoutcasting a 2v2 or 3v3 tournament is much easier than shoutcasting conquest, as a matter of fact it’s almost impossible to keep track of 3 different viewpoints at once.

- From a viewers perspective watching a 2v2 or 3v3 would be simpler because you can see all the players at once, as opposed to conquest where you are guaranteed to miss something throughout the match because it’s impossible to see all three points at one time, it’s honestly just a clusterf*** to watch.

However, in order for this to work, what I proposed needs to be given every quality of life that conquest has, meaning proper leagues, leaderboards, the whole 9 yards. Also touching base from earlier, I’m not saying that both my proposed new game type and conquest couldn’t coexist, in fact they might even work well together since they are different in every way, in terms of numbers, and purpose. However if it came down to it, what would you rather have, a new game mode that could revitalize the scene if done correctly or having conquest just dragging itself along? Personsally I think they should risk it for the biscuit.

Thanks for reading.

Countless

Sorry, unfortunately nothing you listed will improve spvp.

This game needs profession revamps, skill improvements, better and more optional roles to play, more elites and skills, better rewards…

If the game was balanced around 2v2s and 3v3s you would probably get most of that except maybe “more optional roles to play” and “more elite and skills” would come with time. But it would be much more appealing for viewership compared to the awful mess of our 5v5 conquest.

Even if you fixed everything you mentioned we’d still have a game that already no one wants to watch that is exclusionary to the uninitiated viewer, and few want to play unless it’s to farm rewards.

Core things needs to be addressed first… Size of match up is irrelevant.