Guild Wars 2

This 1 game type in PvP is not only getting old, it is HURTING the community. It hurts because it promotes 1 style of play… BUNKERING. It has been such a long time since game release and still there is only one type of game mode.

Please explain to me where the fun is coming up against a team full of bunkers. You either need to have just as many bunkers or need to co ordinate on a level which is impossible in single queue hot join.

Why are we deprived of the game types all the other PvP games have? Where is Death Match, Capture the Flag, Golden Gun, 2v2 3v3 4v4..

I’m not saying to ditch the node defending game type, keep it. If people like that, then let them all bunker together. But can the rest of us, who like to have something different, have other options.. please? Going from one game to another, just because of the lack of game types.. is getting old. Eventually, I won’t come back.

Why are we subjected to this Bunker or go home style of game play mentality ?

Most people in this game don’t play bunker, so where do you get this “bunker or go home” from? Even top teams only go with one guardian(or went, because top teams are gone).
Also they have already talked about new modes and there are some leaks of things they are thinking about.

ahuba.6430:

Also they have already talked about new modes and there are some leaks of things they are thinking about.

I think it’s not the time to be thinking anymore. PvP community (or what remains) won’t survive Christmas if not given subsantial content.

TDM: 5 perma stealth thieves kill 1 guy. GG.

Conquest: Bunkering can be effective, but 5 skilled DPS players can beat bunker teams so that is based on the players not devs.

Capture the flag might be cool or something like stockpile from halo, where you have to capture the flags and hold them to get points. Or even oddball might have some interesting comps come into play.

King of the hill could be interesting too though that is a conquest variant.
Golden Gun (if this is a one shot one kill type thing) = thief 1500 range steal from stealth.

We already have super mario smash bros aka skyhammer.

The population of the game cannot support splitting ques with 2v2’s, 3v3’s etc., so implementation of those is a terrible idea (although I think 2v2 and 3v3’s TDM tourneys in some custom arenas would be interesting).

As far as potentially viable game modes are concerned:

TDM – Can’t work in this game as it is currently structured. Like Eura pointed out, 5 thieves + shadow refuge, then 3,2,1,SPIKE and no matter what you do there is an auto down followed by a high probability stomp and the TDM is over. The thief heavy team would just burst down opponents 1 by 1 and there would be no counter for it.

CtF – Definitely has potential. Just like the Conquest maps you can put in secondary objectives for flavor and make this really interesting.

KotH – Is probably the closest thing to a TDM that could be viable in this combat system. It would draw most of the team to a single location depending on the implementation of secondary objectives and still give some form of area control reward that could off-set the killing spree of a TDM.

Relic Runs – while similar to CtF could be another game type with a slightly different flavor that this combat system would implement well.

Objective Attack/Defend – Yep, I am going to beat the dead horse just a bit more. A game mode that resembles GvG would work in this game, and before you even say it Foefire does not resemble GvG at all. The map looks almost like GvG and that is nice, but it lacks the map interaction and strategic depth of actual GvG. Even something that functioned similar to JQ or FA that had better symmetry (for balance) and fewer NPC’s (because there are already too many in this game’s PvP) would be a functional option in this game’s combat system.

Some kind of a respawn limited variant of the above could be really interesting too. It isn’t exactly TDM, but some kind of mechanic to prevent a downed/defeated from being able to respawn could be a cool, strategically deep way to get interesting match dynamics that would be somewhat similar to a TDM. Maybe something like a Bloodstone for a node that the person can’t respawn if they die on it, or some kind of long channeled Dhuum summon where the scary dude shows up and eats the downed player’s soul if they can get the channel off before the guy bleeds out into defeated. /Shrug I dunno.

Ultimately I can see a system where a multi-round tournament containing all of the different game modes that come up with (randomly, round by round) would work pretty well, but that is a long ways away from here.

This is hindsight, I also want to see more modes.

Here’s why I think why ANet aren’t adding more game modes. It would fragment PvP which already doesn’t have enough players as-is. In that way it makes a lot of sense to consolidate the community into one game mode. This begs the question though: would adding another game mode possibly attract more players?

I think one way to do it would be to, say, each month release a new game mode (and remove the previous one, similar to the LS release system). This way they could gather metrics on which mode attracts the most players without risking fragmenting the community. At the end of the run they could chose one or two of those modes based on how popular they were and make them permanent.

Pros

- It would be a big draw into the PvP community because PvP would be getting “new shinies”.
- The developers would be able to experiment with fresh ideas without too much risk much in the same way as the LS.
- They do have some existing modes from previous LS updates. Dragon Ball, Reaper’s Rumble, Aspect Arena come to mind. This is some free development that has been done in the past that they don’t need to worry about doing from scratch.
- Reaper’s Rumble would probably be one of the permanent game modes :P

Cons

- There would no doubt be loads of QQ.
- It would alienate the existing players who enjoy the current zone control mode. The zone control could thrown in the middle though to get its votes (but it would probably do artificially poorly because it’s not new and exciting).
- The current maps may become useless. That’s a lot of money to throw down the drain.

Conquest type has some potential but as it is now, its totally boring..Well i think that the gametype of mobas is the best.I really dont like that when i kill a player i earn so little..After all is pvp, its all about killing players with secondary mechanics.The main mechanic is killing and you cant make a fun game without it…

zamalek.2154:

_*Cons*

- There would no doubt be loads of QQ.
- It would alienate the existing players who enjoy the current zone control mode. The zone control could thrown in the middle though to get its votes (but it would probably do artificially poorly because it’s not new and exciting).
- The current maps may become useless. That’s a lot of money to throw down the drain.

Yeah, that and it isn’t remotely realistic to invest the resources to develop several more game modes that you then just throw away.

Anet/NC Soft is not the US Gov’t. They can’t just print more money and spend money that they don’t have.

They need to pick one thing and execute it extremely well. Fire with a precision, high powered rifle at the target you want. Don’t just blast a shotgun into the sky and hope a bird falls down.

I really don’t think death-match/team death-match would work. I think Kill Confirmed would work if you had to bring enemy “souls” to a capture point to score.

I honestly think only 3 game modes are needed. One would be conquest. The other would be GvG. And the last would have to be KotH, KC(Kill Confirmed), or CtF.

6 PvP modes a la GW1 is too much and divided that player base quite a bit.

Anets idea of new game types:

One hit one kill meta
Phantasm D/D maximum special-fx meta
Engi HGH condition spamming meta
Necromancer aim anywhere meta
Spirit Ranger run around the point meta
Bunker Warrior immortal healing meta

etc. etc, May have made some of them up but you get the idea.

Myrmidian Eudoros.4671:

Yeah, that and it isn’t remotely realistic to invest the resources to develop several more game modes that you then just throw away.

You might have missed the point I made about the LS. That has been money “thrown away” (which it really wasn’t: it’s called market research) that ANet were happy to do. Notwithstanding that I mentioned that they have made throwaway PvP modes in the past: Dragon Ball, Reaper’s Rumble. I’m not sure if you ever played them, but they were PvP (your UI switched to the PvP UI).

Myrmidian Eudoros.4671:

Don’t just blast a shotgun into the sky and hope a bird falls down.

Which is exactly not what I said. Releasing 5 game modes at once is spraying and praying, gathering metrics is not – it’s called market research through rapid iteration. Currently conquest is simply not working out. Will it ever be done really well? How do you improve it or replace it with zero evidence of what improvements your player base enjoys? Unreliable or emotional verbal player feedback? Or involvement statistics gathered from monitoring how many players play game modes from short-term experiments.

I said, or implied, all of that already. Exemplifying my point about the questionable value of verbal player feedback. The point I made about “1 game mode at a time” might have been missed, as well. But that should have been obvious when I mentioned the LS release system.

It’s very hard (or possibly impossible) to do A/B testing in a PvP environment, but the LS type of release system comes close. Is that the idea behind the LS, to find out how to evolve PvE in the long run? Possibly. If people give up on TA very quickly, for example, ANet learns it was a bad idea because it’s not popular. If people give up on Reaper’s Rumble, CTF or whatever they learn that those modes are not popular and come out with a better understanding of their market (which is money well spent).

Edit: Every time game modes are mentioned people start theorycrafting about what game modes would work and which ones wouldn’t. Players also theorycraft about what improvements to conquest could be made and which ones would be more fun. Truth is nobody knows what is more fun because there is exactly zero research behind what’s fun and what’s not. Our ideas are just as bad, if not worse, than ANet’s – the only way to change that would be proactively find out what people enjoy and what they don’t. That’s not saying that ANet have done a bad job, realizing the opportunity for change is a good thing – failure is part of success.

But i think the point isn’t just about balance because lets face it balancing team death match is pretty much saying we have to make all the classes the same.
But what i think people are trying to say is it should be …..fun.

And thats what hotjoin is for right. If you want basic balanced team comp heavy games. That is what tourneys are for. Where you should be rewarded at least 3 times as much for winning, which should also scale up with your rating, as hot joins (downside is you’re not rewarded half as much for losing and your rating goes down)

http://halo.bungie.org/bwu/images/RACE/menu.jpg

Though i think that picture is a pretty good example. Its kinda the same thing you’ll find in like TF 2, or even WoW.

Just patch by patch we don’t need every thing at once.

Give us 3 easy boxes, possibly a little different between them. Put 5 – 8 people on each side. And let us go at it. That is fun content that we would enjoy. Of course they’d be QQ about X team or build.

And i think the voting system would be great for that. Though i do think there should be a bigger reward for finishing matches till the end to discourage so many leavers

Yeah Kentrey the fun vs. serious problem is interesting. Your “pro” players all start as casual players – you somehow need to cater for both.

You might find that a balance change, game mode tweak or a new game mode makes the game more fun – but that change could severely impact the serious “pro” side of things.

I would enjoy a version of Keg Brawl in pvp with pvp rewards. I loved Hutt Ball in SWTOR.

ahuba.6430:

Most people in this game don’t play bunker, so where do you get this “bunker or go home” from? Even top teams only go with one guardian(or went, because top teams are gone).
Also they have already talked about new modes and there are some leaks of things they are thinking about.

I also don’t understand this. Teams with more than two tanky builds haven’t really done well since last October or so, and most now opt for only one tanky build out of five players.

And yes, testing on new game modes has been mentioned by devs a couple of times.

Dueling and deathmatch(no TDM) would rip me from WvW/PVE.

1vs1 was the thing I originally wanted to play when I got this game. I read somewhere GW2 would have it but found out after buying Guild Wars 2 that it wasn’t included.

everyone thinks that a thief team would win that hard?
obv to see they really don’t know how to fight, if the thieves are that bursty, they would get one shot if the remaining 4 up members on the opposing team used 1 aoe skill on the downed player.

Still 5v5 would be dumb. 3v3 would be meta.

Cheri Wolf.3056:

everyone thinks that a thief team would win that hard?
obv to see they really don’t know how to fight, if the thieves are that bursty, they would get one shot if the remaining 4 up members on the opposing team used 1 aoe skill on the downed player.

Still 5v5 would be dumb. 3v3 would be meta.

People are saying the thief team would down one player and shadowstep stomp him, and would then perma-stealth for 14 minutes until time ran out and win. It would be a really good strategy, actually. You could even have 4 thieves bring along a dedicated rezzer/stomper like a focus ele, and just keep him stealthed with clusterbomb smoke fields. Just in case you messed up really badly multiple times.

Thieves are in control right now because they can’t choose every fight—if the enemy has two points, they have to attack, no choice. The irony is that people say conquest doesn’t reward fighting when it’s exactly what forces people to fight.

Or you know, they all wear like soldiers and take 100% crit chance while stealthed. So they can’t be counter bursted and still do crazy coordinated spike damage.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

1) We’re trying maps with no cap points.
2) We’re trying mechanics that focus on high risk/reward mechanics that can win to sudden wins/sudden losses.
3) We’re trying maps that focus on “big play” moments that permanently impact the map flow/map status.
4) I can’t give an ETA on when you’d see one live, because we’re trying different maps, and each of them takes time to prototype, etc.

I think that conquest is easy for new players to get into, and it’s allowed for some amazing high-level games so far! But we’d like to try some new things that get away from conquest.

Also, as many of us have said, we want to give players enough variety such that they can change what they play from time to time, while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I know this isn’t a super exhaustive answer, but just wanted to give you guys a quick update.

A map with no cap points………YES PLEASE!!!!

I agree with the OP.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

1) We’re trying maps with no cap points.
2) We’re trying mechanics that focus on high risk/reward mechanics that can win to sudden wins/sudden losses.
3) We’re trying maps that focus on “big play” moments that permanently impact the map flow/map status.
4) I can’t give an ETA on when you’d see one live, because we’re trying different maps, and each of them takes time to prototype, etc.

I think that conquest is easy for new players to get into, and it’s allowed for some amazing high-level games so far! But we’d like to try some new things that get away from conquest.

Also, as many of us have said, we want to give players enough variety such that they can change what they play from time to time, while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I know this isn’t a super exhaustive answer, but just wanted to give you guys a quick update.

How about…you know, a test server?! No glory, no reward, just a few servers set up and designed to gauge average player interaction. Or a test realm all together, a secondary mini-client that had pre-live balance passes and mechanics for testing outside of the general internal setting.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Also, as many of us have said, we want to give players enough variety such that they can change what they play from time to time, while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I know this isn’t a super exhaustive answer, but just wanted to give you guys a quick update.

I have a question, who says that you have to split ques for different game types why can’t all the different game types be in the same team and solo qUe .kind of like battlegrounds from World of Warcraft. just come out with a veto system ifplayers don’t want to play that game type or map

I would be surprised if they did that as it would basically be death-match. On the other hand I wouldn’t mind a big flatland with a few hills and a flag or powerup in the middle. It would be Zerg Vs. Zerg, but at least it would be guaranteed team-play.

Also I guess they should add something to break up the 5v5, because at the start everyone would know who the victor is. Maybe more power ups on the map.

I’m all for new game modes as long as there is a reason for there to be all over the map. I’ve done some deathmatch in SWTOR recently and being split up and having to risk being outnumbered ought to be a part of any deathmatch style format.

When you’re all clumped up together it’s not going to be all that great.

Zietlogik.6208:

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

1) We’re trying maps with no cap points.
2) We’re trying mechanics that focus on high risk/reward mechanics that can win to sudden wins/sudden losses.
3) We’re trying maps that focus on “big play” moments that permanently impact the map flow/map status.
4) I can’t give an ETA on when you’d see one live, because we’re trying different maps, and each of them takes time to prototype, etc.

I think that conquest is easy for new players to get into, and it’s allowed for some amazing high-level games so far! But we’d like to try some new things that get away from conquest.

Also, as many of us have said, we want to give players enough variety such that they can change what they play from time to time, while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I know this isn’t a super exhaustive answer, but just wanted to give you guys a quick update.

How about…you know, a test server?! No glory, no reward, just a few servers set up and designed to gauge average player interaction. Or a test realm all together, a secondary mini-client that had pre-live balance passes and mechanics for testing outside of the general internal setting.

A test server only works if you have a prototype ready and it seems they don’t.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

I want a tower in the middle of the next map please. 50% fall damage might be a useful trait.

Krayiss.4926:

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

I want a tower in the middle of the next map please. 50% fall damage might be a useful trait.

You know what just throw in the mad kings clock tower into the center of Foefire please, thanks. Cap point at the top

Krayiss.4926:

Krayiss.4926:

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

I want a tower in the middle of the next map please. 50% fall damage might be a useful trait.

You know what just throw in the mad kings clock tower into the center of Foefire please, thanks. Cap point at the top

+1000

Maybe if said thief team’s existed, the dev’s would have to have to realistically evaluate how strong stealth and undetected burst is…

Though spending an hour in WVW would help with that…

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

1) We’re trying maps with no cap points.
2) We’re trying mechanics that focus on high risk/reward mechanics that can win to sudden wins/sudden losses.
3) We’re trying maps that focus on “big play” moments that permanently impact the map flow/map status.
4) I can’t give an ETA on when you’d see one live, because we’re trying different maps, and each of them takes time to prototype, etc.

I think that conquest is easy for new players to get into, and it’s allowed for some amazing high-level games so far! But we’d like to try some new things that get away from conquest.

Also, as many of us have said, we want to give players enough variety such that they can change what they play from time to time, while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I know this isn’t a super exhaustive answer, but just wanted to give you guys a quick update.

Nice update Jonathan. Though it would be awesome to see some of these on a ‘test server’ which anyone can access to test.

Don’t forget the Gauntlet and Tequatl situations with PVE. Anet thought it would take forever for these to be completed yet people got through them easily, then in the case of the first worked out how to do it with such efficiency, it become the biggest gold farm in game. You have a lot of players who want to help you test these things, who can immediately point out issues that could be missed by a small test group.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

1) We’re trying maps with no cap points.
2) We’re trying mechanics that focus on high risk/reward mechanics that can win to sudden wins/sudden losses.
3) We’re trying maps that focus on “big play” moments that permanently impact the map flow/map status.
4) I can’t give an ETA on when you’d see one live, because we’re trying different maps, and each of them takes time to prototype, etc.

I think that conquest is easy for new players to get into, and it’s allowed for some amazing high-level games so far! But we’d like to try some new things that get away from conquest.

Also, as many of us have said, we want to give players enough variety such that they can change what they play from time to time, while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I know this isn’t a super exhaustive answer, but just wanted to give you guys a quick update.

On the topic of “new players easily getting into conquest”: you don’t teach new players conquest. You funnel them to hotjoin which is a conquest map that actually rewards them to NOT play conquest. They then struggle to get into matches with friends, etc and many of them quit.

I am blown away by this. This is such a foundation element that has been missing FOR OVER A YEAR. Such a simple fix with high impact. (impact is diminishing day by day because new players are fewer and fewer).

I’m not sure if you guys discuss “low hanging fruit” in your office, but this would be a great example of this.

Edit: I went hunting (wow that was depressing btw) by searching through my past posts and found https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Big-Changes-before-Christmas/first#post912162 which was in December of 2012. I was begging for changes to hotjoin so that the players that get the game for Christmas would be encouraged to stay….

Make Heroes’ Ascent please

BlackenX.7386:

Make Heroes’ Ascent please

This and traditional GvG is all the pvp population truly wants.

Zietlogik.6208:

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

1) We’re trying maps with no cap points.
2) We’re trying mechanics that focus on high risk/reward mechanics that can win to sudden wins/sudden losses.
3) We’re trying maps that focus on “big play” moments that permanently impact the map flow/map status.
4) I can’t give an ETA on when you’d see one live, because we’re trying different maps, and each of them takes time to prototype, etc.

I think that conquest is easy for new players to get into, and it’s allowed for some amazing high-level games so far! But we’d like to try some new things that get away from conquest.

Also, as many of us have said, we want to give players enough variety such that they can change what they play from time to time, while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I know this isn’t a super exhaustive answer, but just wanted to give you guys a quick update.

How about…you know, a test server?! No glory, no reward, just a few servers set up and designed to gauge average player interaction. Or a test realm all together, a secondary mini-client that had pre-live balance passes and mechanics for testing outside of the general internal setting.

I could see people getting excited about the game again if this happened.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details.

Please analyze pvp games and modes that where succesfull in the esportscene. Correct me if i am wrong but literally every single one that i can think off is about killing the opposing player (s). There are differences in mechanics but it always evolves around creating pvp skirmishes.

If i had to design a pvp mode i would try to follow a few set rules:

- The main goal needs to be to kill the opposing player (s).
- You need mechanics or a layout that splits people up to avoid a zergfest.
- Dont let secondary objectives / ingredients impact the game too much.
- Create a layout that doesnt doesnt benefit a certain type of playstyle/team to much. Chokepoints are fine but dont make it too easy to shut people out. Make it open enough for people who want to kite but with enough areas to LoS when needed.

I would organize a community contest titled: “the community knows best”. In this contest i would let the community come up with ideas for pvp modes with a nice set of prices for the guys who come up with the best ideas.

They would need to follow a certain standard format including a nice moodboard etc etc etc.

Locuz.2651:

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details.

Please analyze pvp games and modes that where succesfull in the esportscene. Correct me if i am wrong but literally every single one that i can think off is about killing the opposing player (s). There are differences in mechanics but it always evolves around creating pvp skirmishes.

If i had to design a pvp mode i would try to follow a few set rules:

- The main goal needs to be to kill the opposing player (s).
- You need mechanics or a layout that splits people up to avoid a zergfest.
- Dont let secondary objectives / ingredients impact the game too much.
- Create a layout that doesnt doesnt benefit a certain type of playstyle/team to much. Chokepoints are fine but dont make it too easy to shut people out. Make it open enough for people who want to kite but with enough areas to LoS when needed.

I would organize a community contest titled: “the community knows best”. In this contest i would let the community come up with ideas for pvp modes with a nice set of prices for the guys who come up with the best ideas.

They would need to follow a certain standard format including a nice moodboard etc etc etc.

Sounds like you want conquest! Control of the map is gained by defeating enemy players, splits are encouraged, secondary objectives stay in the background (on most maps), balanced comps are encouraged (1 support/tank + varying types of dps/burst/mobility/utility builds), kiting is easy but doesn’t contribute to map control.

I’m being completely serious. People don’t realize how much conquest pushes the opposing teams at each other and forces combat, while still allowing team splits and role variety. I’m glad that the devs are working on new game modes, but it is not so easy to come up with something better as we seem to think.

Thanks for the info Jon. I truly believe if GW2 launched with death match, sPvP would be way way way more popular, like 20 times more popular. Now I am afraid it might be too late. But hopefully not.

And as much as I hate the downed state mechanic for PvP, I think it would have worked for death match.

I would love to see a 3v3 or 4v4 game-mode based around a team-fight/ladder progression (kind of like tug-of-war in a way). Here is how it works.

Both teams start on the opposite end of an arena with 3 large capture-points between them (in a line) and some kind of finishing objective at the end (kill the lord, destroy the statue, etc). Each team has their close capture-point, and the middle is neutral. Capture points can’t be taken unless the adjacent one is taken. So teams have to start-out fighting over the mid-node. Whoever wins that (lets call them TeamA) can work on capping the far-node, but still need to protect the mid while that happens. The team that lost the mid-fight (TeamB) must now defend their home node while trying to recap mid. TeamB has an easier time defending home b/c it is much closer to their spawn than the opponent’s. If TeamB can decap the mid-node, their home node is safe again. If TeamA decaps the far node (not capped yet), they don’t need to defend mid. If TeamA caps the far node, they now have to complete the final objective to win while holding that node as well. If it is protect the lord, the lord is invulnerable unless the attackers control the closest node.

The basic idea is to force relatively even team-fights that focus on winning fights versus other objectives to be able to win. By doing this, you also don’t have the instagib-cannon issue you do with team deathmatch.

By the way, I thoroughly enjoy conquest as it is, but I think having variety can be a great thing. The more fun ways to play the game the more people will play. When I play multiplayer games with my friends with love to experiment around with all kinds of various modes, and games that have those options attract us to play more – all so we can enjoy a fun playstyle in different ways, and gw2 has a very fun playstyle.

relic run from gw1 plz

A (possibly random) rotating king of the hill with secondary objectives would be pretty nice.

JonathanSharp.7094:

while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I honest to god do NOT understand your ‘fracture’ point you have been trying to make since the release of GW2.

Well why then, in GW1 with a lot less players, did we have no problems with everyone playing so many different modes? And you’re worried about that in GW2!? To this day people are still spread out with no problems between FA, JQ, RA, HA, and GvG. Would be people in TA too if you didn’t remove it and replace it with the worst arena I’ve ever witness in my life.

I don’t even…. just put in all modes, and people stick to what they enjoy. What’s the problem with that?? Simpler to just force everyone into what YOU want? Isn’t this for the players after all?

Sigh.

Btw, GvG please. You can make it work if you are half the ANet you were during GW1. I am all for more modes but I don’t want some crappy TDM, what ‘we’ (I believe) want is a competitive mode OTHER than conquest, because it’s boring as hell.

I appreciate you taking the time to let us know wassup.

I understand e-sports is important to you, but fun is first and foremost more important to US, the players. What is the use for e-sports when it’s boring to play? Conquest isn’t even balanced as it is, so just give us the mode and let us play with it and we can go from there.

I still don’t understand why drop GvG in the first place?

would love to see a 5v5 3man teams^^

so 3v3v3v3v3

could be fun^^

or let you help from the players and add to the hotjoin browser all 3 months for 1 week a new Categorie called ALPHA TEST and show the players the uncompletet maps with a feedback panel what theylike or dislike with some coments + and dont give any glory or rankpoints or whatever reward

i bet this could create some rly nice content over time with everyone would be happy
and it would show you early trends like people love/hate this, 1 class would be overpowered in this, timerz, classbalance for the map, what people bring- play ppl the map how you think it should be played, creative thinking from masses on this new map prototype bring you feedback you never would have thought about

maby it show you you can create things people would lvoe to play and waste all there time and you never thought this would be possible

let help you^^

Mathias.9657:

JonathanSharp.7094:

while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I honest to god do NOT understand your ‘fracture’ point you have been trying to make since the release of GW2.

Yeah I never understood it either, because the community is as fractured as you are going to get already, with them designing for it not to be fractured.

If they had a queue system in place at launch, they could have easily treated different “game modes” as “different” maps we have for domination currently. So as “fractured” as we would be in maps right now, we would be in game modes in that plan.

I think the problem is there were so paranoid from perceived notions of player base being fractured in GW1 (which probably is true) that they designed GW2 with that paranoia in mind. Which is why there is one game mode with several maps. I also think they felt having one game mode like LoL would be conductive to eSports. Their map, mini-map and UI seems extremely eSport friendly when you look at it.

They should have designed their sPvP with more emphasis on “fun” instead of an emphasis on the paranoia of fracturing the community and eSports and I think we would have been in better shape.

But this is me just saying stuff, it is easier said than done.

JonathanSharp.7094:

I think that conquest is easy for new players to get into, and it’s allowed for some amazing high-level games so far! But we’d like to try some new things that get away from conquest.

New players can get into any game mode easily, even if it is a little bit more complicated. DoTA mechanics are significantly more complex to understand than GW2 conquest, yet it is extremely popular and noob/casual friendly.

felivear.1536:

On the topic of “new players easily getting into conquest”: you don’t teach new players conquest. You funnel them to hotjoin which is a conquest map that actually rewards them to NOT play conquest. They then struggle to get into matches with friends, etc and many of them quit.

I am blown away by this. This is such a foundation element that has been missing FOR OVER A YEAR. Such a simple fix with high impact. (impact is diminishing day by day because new players are fewer and fewer).

I’m not sure if you guys discuss “low hanging fruit” in your office, but this would be a great example of this.

Edit: I went hunting (wow that was depressing btw) by searching through my past posts and found https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Big-Changes-before-Christmas/first#post912162 which was in December of 2012. I was begging for changes to hotjoin so that the players that get the game for Christmas would be encouraged to stay….

Did you notice that several of your ideas have been implemented? For example TPVP is just one round (2 teams), you can now access all the pvp options from the pvp tab, burst classes/builds were nerfed (unfortunately now virtual bunker can burst you with conditions or stuns, haha). That’s quite a lot actually; seems like someone is listening.

Your ideas for the scoring didn’t make it, but I don’t like them so that is good imo. However, I know and like what you are shooting for, and your other ideas like giving spvpers something to take with them to other parts of the game, are also themes that the community keeps asking for. I was a pretty insightful post really, for something 10 months old.

Myrmidian Eudoros.4671:

TDM – Can’t work in this game as it is currently structured. Like Eura pointed out, 5 thieves + shadow refuge, then 3,2,1,SPIKE and no matter what you do there is an auto down followed by a high probability stomp and the TDM is over. The thief heavy team would just burst down opponents 1 by 1 and there would be no counter for it.

It definitely could work. Do you know heroes ascent from GW1? I really whish anet builds something like that, and if they put a conquest map as first, a 5 thieves team would be blown away by any other team (with a brain) and wouldn’t even get to the TDM map.

stemare.2578:

Myrmidian Eudoros.4671:

TDM – Can’t work in this game as it is currently structured. Like Eura pointed out, 5 thieves + shadow refuge, then 3,2,1,SPIKE and no matter what you do there is an auto down followed by a high probability stomp and the TDM is over. The thief heavy team would just burst down opponents 1 by 1 and there would be no counter for it.

It definitely could work. Do you know heroes ascent from GW1? I really whish anet builds something like that, and if they put a conquest map as first, a 5 thieves team would be blown away by any other team (with a brain) and wouldn’t even get to the TDM map.

For a good long while the wall paper on my computer was a screenie I took while holding HoH, so yeah, I know HA.

Think about the cheese that HA had to endure over the years. IWAY, Blood Spike, Orb Spike, SWAY… too many others to waste the time cataloging them here. If they put in TDM an optimal thief heavy comp (probably 4 thieves and a bunker guard or 3 thieves a tanky DPS and a Guard) would emerge if the occurrence of the TDM was predictable (like the first match in HA was predictable).

I like the play of a TDM match too (in other games), but this combat system with teams of 5 would require secondary objectives to split the teams which makes it not really TDM anymore. There is just too much damage for a pure 5v5 TDM to work.

JonathanSharp.7094:

Just to confirm, we are working on new maps. I can’t give too many details, but a few things:

1) We’re trying maps with no cap points.
2) We’re trying mechanics that focus on high risk/reward mechanics that can win to sudden wins/sudden losses.
3) We’re trying maps that focus on “big play” moments that permanently impact the map flow/map status.
4) I can’t give an ETA on when you’d see one live, because we’re trying different maps, and each of them takes time to prototype, etc.

I think that conquest is easy for new players to get into, and it’s allowed for some amazing high-level games so far! But we’d like to try some new things that get away from conquest.

Also, as many of us have said, we want to give players enough variety such that they can change what they play from time to time, while also being sure that we don’t fracture the player-base by spreading players out to too many different game types.

I know this isn’t a super exhaustive answer, but just wanted to give you guys a quick update.

Tks Jonathan, these are very good news, many ppl burned out because of conquest. Many will come back with these changes.

Also about spreading the players, if you guys manage to attract more players into PvP, that wont be a problem.

Keep it up! I donw wanna rush you but… bring it on ASAP ;P