Guild Wars 2

The one thing i wanted since the start of this game in spvp was deathmatches , where it would be fun instead of conquest which gets boring after a short peroid of time . There should be 2 modes : deathmatch (normal respawning ) and then for tournaments death match (no respawns) eliminate all players .This would bring more depth to pvp, of course im aware that currently spvp is unbalanced and bunker builds and zerk builds are dominant which need fixing , which would be required for this to happen

Soo……. yeah…..

You cant have death match with out Healer Classes, Kiting and Ranged classes would overshadow Melee classes even more than they do now (If that is even possible).

i agree as i said spvp need balancing alot but i think they to hire some people dedicated to spvp as it is getting overshadowed by pve i think

Apolo.5942:

You cant have death match with out Healer Classes, Kiting and Ranged classes would overshadow Melee classes even more than they do now (If that is even possible).

I disgree about needing a healer class. There have been games with a deathmatch mode where all damage dealing comps were viable even when healers were available. Furthermore, you have “support” roles in this game that can fill that role, its just that they can’t sustain a team indefinitely. This makes the matches more fast paced and frankly better.

As far as the Ranged v. Melee debate is concerned… it is one of the many balance issues at the moment, but it is not the same discussion as whether or not Deathmatch would be a good addition to the game.

More PvP styles would be good. Particularly if you didn’t know what kind of match you were going into when queing for tournaments, because it would create more variety in the teams.

• Dadly, would be too unbalanced with how fast some classes can kill compared to others…

• Imagine going death match against 5 mesmers? :|

• Not saying i want healers, but .. without them, team would just gank on 1 player and nothing could stop him from dying..

would love death-match tho, also maybe 1v1 Winner stays type of games or 1v1v1v1 fighting for king of the hill..

Myrmidian Eudoros.4671:

Apolo.5942:

You cant have death match with out Healer Classes, Kiting and Ranged classes would overshadow Melee classes even more than they do now (If that is even possible).

I disgree about needing a healer class. There have been games with a deathmatch mode where all damage dealing comps were viable even when healers were available. Furthermore, you have “support” roles in this game that can fill that role, its just that they can’t sustain a team indefinitely. This makes the matches more fast paced and frankly better.

As far as the Ranged v. Melee debate is concerned… it is one of the many balance issues at the moment, but it is not the same discussion as whether or not Deathmatch would be a good addition to the game.

More PvP styles would be good. Particularly if you didn’t know what kind of match you were going into when queing for tournaments, because it would create more variety in the teams.

To the victor go the spoils, if your enemy team is dead then what ever the objective might be you can freely claim it for your self. That is where healers come in, they make it time consuming and of set some builds that clearly aim for the former. A bunker is cute, but he can simply get ignored until he is alone, and then all his Tankyness wont make an ounce of difference.

And again lets call a spade a spade, for all their talk, Ranged damage is here, debuffers are here, assassins are here, tanks and melee (as dreadful as they are) are here. The only thing lacking is Healers/Support, and it clearly aint working. I mean GW1 has about if not a higher pvp population than GW2, that is right down pathetic. WoW was not the glory of pvp when it launched, but they did dropped several failed models until they nailed it.

I could enjoy a no respawn deathmatch but I would want a secondary mechanic that forces the action. I am not saying that mechanic should be capturing nodes. One team could defend while another attacks then switch the roles. Some kind of mechanic that worsens over time so the teams are not staring at each other comfortably not doing anything.

Frellin.6318:

I could enjoy a no respawn deathmatch but I would want a secondary mechanic that forces the action. I am not saying that mechanic should be capturing nodes. One team could defend while another attacks then switch the roles. Some kind of mechanic that worsens over time so the teams are not staring at each other comfortably not doing anything.

1 v 1 v 1 v 1 ( 4 people ) all fighting for king of the hill :-]

Apolo.5942:

You cant have death match with out Healer Classes, Kiting and Ranged classes would overshadow Melee classes even more than they do now (If that is even possible).

It only hold true when you have a map that is completely flat and nothing else. If you put trees every where then you will see a different result.

Dueling would be a light hearted and fun way to fight friends. This could be a simple option when highlighting the drop Down menu of a players icon. This could also have a on/off toggle switch in the settings to automatically decline duel invitations.

Arena’s would be fun for 2v2, 3v3, and 5v5. This could be done by sending the fighters to a small arena style map with several pillars or objects for “Line of Sight” to be used. While also having an item spawn in a random location. That prevents all healing when obtained by a player. This item could, of course spawn after a long duration and its design would be to prevent bunker battles.

Deathmatch Would be a fun and more aggressive approach to those who would enjoy competitive battling. This could be done by sending larger numbers of players (teams of 8v8+) into a bigger map. This map could vary in its openness but would also have several narrow hall ways or choke points that yield time spawned buffs. The purpose of this would be to create a risk/time spent away from allies to obtain a useful temporary buff. Examples of (opinion) applicable buffs could be:
-Madness:Do 30% extra damage and Take 30% extra damage for X seconds.
-Indomitable:Take 30% less damage for X seconds.
-Rush:Run faster for X seconds.
-Stealth: Go invisible for X seconds.
-Chaos: Teleport you and anyone nearby to a random location on the map.
-Healing Orb:Heals you slightly while pulsing several heals over X seconds to your allies.

Apolo.5942:

You cant have death match with out Healer Classes, Kiting and Ranged classes would overshadow Melee classes even more than they do now (If that is even possible).

Why do people keep saying this crap?

Deathmatch is where people are supposed to die, not be healed for 30 minutes while playing a war of attrition. If anything not having healers is an advantage (Not that long matches wouldn’t happen, I’m sure they would occasionally if you get two teams who are very good at playing defensively).

The other issue (Melee/Ranged) is simply a balance issue, has nothing to do with the type of mode.

LOL deathmatch, imagine full team of dagger ele

Pandabro.8743:

Apolo.5942:

You cant have death match with out Healer Classes, Kiting and Ranged classes would overshadow Melee classes even more than they do now (If that is even possible).

Why do people keep saying this crap?

Deathmatch is where people are supposed to die, not be healed for 30 minutes while playing a war of attrition. If anything not having healers is an advantage (Not that long matches wouldn’t happen, I’m sure they would occasionally if you get two teams who are very good at playing defensively).

The other issue (Melee/Ranged) is simply a balance issue, has nothing to do with the type of mode.

So ye keep saying and so pvp keeps sucking.

Ken.9018:

LOL deathmatch, imagine full team of dagger ele

Vs full team of trap rangers …

Stand in the 5 sets of traps and pew pew out. GG.

Apolo.5942:

You cant have death match with out Healer Classes, Kiting and Ranged classes would overshadow Melee classes even more than they do now (If that is even possible).

I don’t fully agree with you, depending on how the Deathmatch Mode would actually look like.

If Deathmatch was anything with lower numbers than 5v5, you would be right with ranged>melee, but if it would be 5v5 or even 8v8, there would maybe be enough space in the Teamsetup, for some Supporters that help the Melee-classes to attack. There are some great builds that can accomplish that:

- Clerics or Valk-Amu Ele with Glyph of Elemental Power for almost 100% Cripple-Uptime.
- Support-Thief with Caltrops, the caltrops on Dodge and Dancing Dagger for crippling and the Immobilize of the Infiltrator’s Strike and Surprise Shot.
- I’ve even been toying around with some Ele D/D Builds with A LOT of chilled uptime (didn’t work too well so far, but maybe theres sth. to the build after all).

Other than in Conquest, where 5v5’s are rare, in Deathmatch, you could maybe actually play a Char that is a sole Supporter.

The Lack of Healers is another “Problem”. But again, there are some builds with pretty great Support, like of course Ele’s (but less towards tankyness and more towards Support), Shout-Warriors with Healing on Shout and so on, that could maybe work in a deathmatch-Scenario.

I think even in the current Meta, Deathmatch could work – we pretty much would just have to try and see what builds are played.

or just bring back GW1 RA, if they are lazy enough, bring back the exact same map, i wouldn’t mind~!!

Its annoying how so many people want deathmatch and anet seem to be so set upon conquest =/

Players can run deathmatch tournaments with custom arena. What we need first are the features.

Custom Arena – Ability to toggle capture points
Observer Mode – Able to observer official matches and matches in CA if the owner allows it
Solo/Team Que/Leaderboards – this is simply a must

After that Anet can choose which game type suits more for their competitive scene and focus on it.

@PowerBottom
None of those builds is more optimal, than simply bringing more ranged kiting firepower srry. Kiting ability in this game is simply too much for melee to have a real impact with out dedicated healers/support.
Unless you start giving heartseeker strikes to every melee weapon out there for warriors and guardians.

Why do people still want team deathmatch PvP (with no other objectives)? It doesn’t work well in MMORPGs and if you’re looking at making an e-sport, team deathmatch is a bad choice for spectators. I’m sure ArenaNet tried it during development before settling on Conquest.

1. Team Deathmatch often begins with stand-offs or staring contests until someone gets antsy and everyone jumps in. If you rush in or open before-hand, you usually get focused and die. This is bad for casual play and wastes time in organized play. For a spectator, this is also boring to watch.

2. Team Deathmatch is not enjoyable for many players when teams grow larger. Players who are learning to play or trying new builds can be easily frustrated by being shredded by a full enemy team. Just look at all the complaints about how big of a zerg-fest 8v8 conquest is. Team Deathmatch would exacerbate that.

3. Team Deathmatch limits roles and in doing so, limits builds. This also leads into some professions being shunned in teams because there is no mainstream build for them. Other game formats, like Conquest offer additional roles such as area control, both defensive (bunker builds) and offensive (trap rangers, necros), mobility vs static, etc. In general, any format that favors balling up and entire team is bad.

4. Balance is put under a microscope in Team Deathmatch. Because of limited roles and playstyles and the relatively short time in which most matches are decided, balance between professions is crucial. In an RPG where skill variety and profession identity is important, it’s near impossible to achieve this. On the other hand, the conquest format reduces the burden of balancing by providing alternative strategic decisions to overcome some profession imbalances. Balance still matters, but it doesn’t need to be as tight as for Team Deathmatch.

5. Team Deathmatch isn’t fun to watch. To an observer that doesn’t know a lot about the game, it just looks like a huge ball of particle effects and then someone dies. To be a good e-sport, someone with basic understanding needs to be able to observe progress or quickly make sense of what actions accomplish. When you have a score and a node control list, it’s clear who is winning. Also, Conquest tends to avoid a full 5v5 and often has encounters ranging from 2 to 6 players, which are much easier to follow.

Your answer is really appreciated. If ppl would think further, they would get to the same point as you. I think the idea of an objective to be the central point and not the conquest would open alot of possible other modes. For me this is the better direction to go.

JonPeters.5630

Would Anet consider bringing a 3+ teams king of the hill kind of play style. it could be fun with different objectives such as cannons/trebs/buffs/debuffs etc

JonPeters.5630:

1) You can obviously have it without a healer.

I beg to disagree and use your game as an example, we barely have a functional, essentially dead, point control game with out healers. Do you really consider a game mode which only focus is to kill the other team would be any more viable than this?.

I understand you have to use the company line and the whole no trin thing. I suggest its time to reconsider this before this game is completely dead. As i said before, i appreciate the franchise, bought the GW1 games, but at the end of the day, you have to sell the games gamers want to buy, and i honestly doubt GW2 would work as a PvE exclusive, i would even dare say the population decrease in the short less than 8 months after lunch is a rather grim indicative of this. That unless you have given up on micro transactions and expansions, that being the case, ignore my previous comment and do as you please.

Finally something my wvw experience gives me a leg up on. You can absolutely have up to 5v5 fights that are interesting, dynamic, and take a while without healers. And no its not just a burst fest either.

3v3 really feels like the sweet spot for the combat system though.

I have exhaustive experience running essentially 5vN death match and would be happy to discuss likely strategy or anything else. Especially with devs:)

Our fights never start with a staring contest unless were trying to bait a zerg. Mass invis is the best initiator.

JonPeters.5630:

1) You can obviously have it without a healer.
2) Even games people consider to be DM have tons of secondary objectives (Quake 3, counter strike, Starcraft, etc.)
3) Objective based games tend to be both more total noob friendly AND more esport observer friendly as players/watchers can go/look at where the action will likely be.

Jon

sweet you got the idea, now just make some of these game modes now before your playerbase drops out
on top of payload, attack/defend, capture the flag, king of the hill, odd ball, arena, and MOBA

Kline.9561:

sweet you got the idea, now just make some of these game modes now before your playerbase drops out
on top of payload, attack/defend, capture the flag, king of the hill, odd ball, arena, and MOBA

Before? at this point is to try and bring them back, if i counted 25 people max over the weekend on the mist i think i would be exaggerating.

Please tell me they will finally see that people want this game mode.

Didn’t they talk about this in the last SotG? They tried deathmatch, and it basically went like this:

1) Teams stand around staring at each other for a little while
2) Someone gets impatient and both teams run at each other
3) Everyone uses their elites
4) Huge clusterkitten
5) Elites wear off
6) Whoever happens to have more players left over wins

Doesn’t sound fun to me. I didn’t like WoW areas for similar reasons. Battlegrounds were great.

JonPeters.5630:

As we have stated many times we have tried many modes and there is a reason we ended up where we did. This is not to say we will not introduce new modes at some point, however a few notes on death match.

1) You can obviously have it without a healer.
2) Even games people consider to be DM have tons of secondary objectives (Quake 3, counter strike, Starcraft, etc.)
3) Objective based games tend to be both more total noob friendly AND more esport observer friendly as players/watchers can go/look at where the action will likely be.

Deathmatch without other objectives lacks things like a reason to engage, a way to break stalemates, and a tie breaker. It also creates much wider blowouts when someone on your team doesn’t know what they are doing (does this ever happen to you that you get a clueless teammate? Heh)

Hopefully that clears up some of our reasoning for future discussions.

Jon

esports? it’s not the objective anymore
viewer friendly? go to twitch, no one views gw2
We want it because it’s fun to play.

lettucemode.3789:

Didn’t they talk about this in the last SotG? They tried deathmatch, and it basically went like this:

1) Teams stand around staring at each other for a little while
2) Someone gets impatient and both teams run at each other
3) Everyone uses their elites
4) Huge clusterkitten
5) Elites wear off
6) Whoever happens to have more players left over wins

Doesn’t sound fun to me. I didn’t like WoW areas for similar reasons. Battlegrounds were great.

I second this post. Until someone posts specific data not compiled from this message board, I will wholeheartedly disagree with the sentiment that ‘everyone wants DM’ or that ‘DM will save GW2 pvp.’

Acelerion.6820:

Finally something my wvw experience gives me a leg up on. You can absolutely have up to 5v5 fights that are interesting, dynamic, and take a while without healers. And no its not just a burst fest either.

3v3 really feels like the sweet spot for the combat system though.

I have exhaustive experience running essentially 5vN death match and would be happy to discuss likely strategy or anything else. Especially with devs:)

Actually your WvW experience is irrelevant. Your 3v3 or 5v5 doesn’t really affect the outcome of the match. They are still people out they killing, capping and defending the points. So in the grand scheme of things, you are not really doing anything because other people are.

TDM doesn’t work in MMORPG.

3v3v3 King of the hill! with trebs/cannons/buffs etc.. would be awesome as well as worthy of eSport :P

silvermember.8941:

Acelerion.6820:

Finally something my wvw experience gives me a leg up on. You can absolutely have up to 5v5 fights that are interesting, dynamic, and take a while without healers. And no its not just a burst fest either.

3v3 really feels like the sweet spot for the combat system though.

I have exhaustive experience running essentially 5vN death match and would be happy to discuss likely strategy or anything else. Especially with devs:)

Actually your WvW experience is irrelevant. Your 3v3 or 5v5 doesn’t really affect the outcome of the match. They are still people out they killing, capping and defending the points. So in the grand scheme of things, you are not really doing anything because other people are.

TDM doesn’t work in MMORPG.

Of course it doessent effect the outcome. There are tons of people in wvw that play for the fights spvp can’t offer. Death match or similar would work fine.

JonPeters.5630:

3) Objective based games tend to be both more total noob friendly AND more esport observer friendly as players/watchers can go/look at where the action will likely be.

Deathmatch without other objectives lacks things like a reason to engage, a way to break stalemates, and a tie breaker. It also creates much wider blowouts when someone on your team doesn’t know what they are doing (does this ever happen to you that you get a clueless teammate? Heh)

Hopefully that clears up some of our reasoning for future discussions.

Jon

I think this is the real problem, your vision is wrong.

Your conquest mode is not a noob friendly game, is not easy to understand for a noob and is not fun to watch on streming (for a noob) because people don’t understand what happen.

It’s a fact, people without a team have a lot of problems to understand this game, there is no video tutorial or similar to help people to make a balance party (1-2 bunkers, 2-3 burst, 0/1 condition) or teach them how moving between points, the importance to fight on points or to decap points and many other stuff.

This game has few viewers on twitch, a lot of single player games has more viewers than GW2.

So you need to begin to ask why people don’t watch GW2 and why people don’t understand what happen

You are failing a lot under this aspect, you need to improve the communication system that you have.

Acelerion.6820:

Of course it doessent effect the outcome. There are tons of people in wvw that play for the fights spvp can’t offer. Death match or similar would work fine.

I am glad that WvW is in the game. I just don’t think your argument holds weight here when you suggest that ‘SPvP doesn’t have DM so I’ll go to WvW for DM.’

WvW is an objective-based game mode on a large scale. It is not team DM. It allows for imbalances such as the size of your group and the stats on your gear—not necessarily on build or skill.

You could argue that the option is there for a group to focus on downing players but the idea is that it will all lead toward completing the objective. Much like sPvP.

Even more raging lunatic noobs and on top of that AoE city. No thanks because then everyone ego stroke will be push to the top. Mesmers , Ele’s and maybe rangers will dominate in the AoE field while thieves and rangers dominates the 1 vs 1. Forget it this mode would suck and I can smell the kitty cat gameplay in it.

JonPeters.5630:

As we have stated many times we have tried many modes and there is a reason we ended up where we did. This is not to say we will not introduce new modes at some point, however a few notes on death match.

1) You can obviously have it without a healer.
2) Even games people consider to be DM have tons of secondary objectives (Quake 3, counter strike, Starcraft, etc.)
3) Objective based games tend to be both more total noob friendly AND more esport observer friendly as players/watchers can go/look at where the action will likely be.

Deathmatch without other objectives lacks things like a reason to engage, a way to break stalemates, and a tie breaker. It also creates much wider blowouts when someone on your team doesn’t know what they are doing (does this ever happen to you that you get a clueless teammate? Heh)

Hopefully that clears up some of our reasoning for future discussions.

Jon

Hi Jon, the problem is the same alpha testers who told you conquest was a good idea are the same people who told you 8-team tournaments (removed from game), pay to play ticket system (removed from game), and QPs (removed from game) were a good idea.

See the pattern?

JonPeters.5630:

As we have stated many times we have tried many modes and there is a reason we ended up where we did. This is not to say we will not introduce new modes at some point, however a few notes on death match.

1) You can obviously have it without a healer.
2) Even games people consider to be DM have tons of secondary objectives (Quake 3, counter strike, Starcraft, etc.)
3) Objective based games tend to be both more total noob friendly AND more esport observer friendly as players/watchers can go/look at where the action will likely be.

Deathmatch without other objectives lacks things like a reason to engage, a way to break stalemates, and a tie breaker. It also creates much wider blowouts when someone on your team doesn’t know what they are doing (does this ever happen to you that you get a clueless teammate? Heh)

Hopefully that clears up some of our reasoning for future discussions.

Jon

but you went with conquest. A game type that isnt very successful on any other game except perhaps Battlefield. Games like team fortress 2, league of legends, gears of war, etc have tried it before you, and it was never very popular on any of those games. Yet you chose to go with it anyway, despite it never being something people want to watch or E-sport worthy. So i’m confused why you decided to settle on a game mode that hasnt been picking up much buzz.

The moba style game play is suddenly erupting in popularity. Despite dota always having a popular fanbase, league of legends brought it to a much wider audience.

Even dungeon defenders 2 as reviewed at the link below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6BKNFV9j9f4

is turning to the popular moba style play, only with a new twist involving no item snowballing as well as other features to keep games short and to make it work in a more casual environment. Guild wars 2 could have easily created their own style of game similiar with its own rules that would not require the gear snowball effect. And it would have been popular. Reapers Rumble is still considered by many to be one of the funnest pvp mini games introduced, why not something more like this? A game mode that is gaining popularity instead of a game mode that never had huge success on any other game?

I dont beleive the team took into consideration their competition when creating this game, which may play a big role into why it wasnt very successfull as other games have been. Also i can go to other pvp mmo’s etc and not pay anything to play…planetside 2, firefall are just two recent examples….you dont offer as good of a product, and you charge more…..i dont know how you can continue to offer less than your competition who has the features in beta you still dont have nearly 9 months later, and expect to hold or attract players.

Lexiculus.5296:

Acelerion.6820:

Of course it doessent effect the outcome. There are tons of people in wvw that play for the fights spvp can’t offer. Death match or similar would work fine.

I am glad that WvW is in the game. I just don’t think your argument holds weight here when you suggest that ‘SPvP doesn’t have DM so I’ll go to WvW for DM.’

WvW is an objective-based game mode on a large scale. It is not team DM. It allows for imbalances such as the size of your group and the stats on your gear—not necessarily on build or skill.

You could argue that the option is there for a group to focus on downing players but the idea is that it will all lead toward completing the objective. Much like sPvP.

Wvw is a big open place where you can run around and kill people. A lot of competitive players prefer that to standing in circles and so there are quite a few groups who do nothing but roam around looking for fights.

These groups fight each other as 5v5, 3v3 or whatever. Its a death match with no one keeping score. It is directly relatable to how death match would work in a structured setting.

Saying its going to be nothing but aoe, saying its going to be nothing but thieves, is pure conjecture on peoples parts. I fight groups of thieves all the time and its a joke compared to a balanced group.

I’d also like to add, that conquest style game modes are a lot funner and more successfull with lots of players as it counters a lot of sore issues that have come from trying to restrict it to 5 players. If you wanted 5 player e-sport, you should have chose a game mode that serves that better.

these team DM in wx3 is not part of the game. Most of there just becuz there no DM in spvp and it does not help the world your in win. THough small team that roam and pick fights with other group are helping with the objective as their stall/delay/prevent reinforcement from achieving their goal.

Yes standing in a small circle is boring and also disadvantage to some class that requires good positioning/kiting.

DM is fun and should be added just for passing time, that my take as more game mode does’t harm the game.

Lexiculus.5296:

I am glad that WvW is in the game. I just don’t think your argument holds weight here when you suggest that ‘SPvP doesn’t have DM so I’ll go to WvW for DM.’

WvW is an objective-based game mode on a large scale. It is not team DM. It allows for imbalances such as the size of your group and the stats on your gear—not necessarily on build or skill.

You could argue that the option is there for a group to focus on downing players but the idea is that it will all lead toward completing the objective. Much like sPvP.

actually there is some weight to that statement, i personally prefer to run in a small squad capping supply camps, why? cause, the most fun i have is when i run into an enemy squad death match style. i’m not saying that’s why everyone plays WvW, nor is that the only reason i play it. i’m saying that’s the most fun i have out of all the PvP in gw2. simply put, i feel death match is missing from sPvP from experience.

from what i read no one here was saying what WvW was about or talking about balance, so i dont really understand that part of your post. if you want to get technical many classes are still bugged and/or imbalanced, which makes even conquest far from perfect. others and i, are simply stating that we ran into “death match” style fights and found them enjoyable, that is all.

conquest is honestly why i hardly play sPvP, i have been playing it more now simply to get better. it’s faster paced then WvW , which makes it great for practice. however i feel sPvP really needs new game modes, even if it’s a twist on death match. something new is needed and its been far to long.

All I’m saying is that based on my experience with wvw fights a 5v5 death match would be interesting and fun. Nothing more.

I’m very aware its not “part of the game”. People do it for fun just like dueling hot join servers. It would be nice if anet supported it.

Why does everyone assume we want a Team deathmatch?

15 players, no teams, one room, deathmatch. With custom arenas implemented, this would be a nice, fun option.

Adding some sort of Arena mode(2v2,3v3) would be a great asset to this game, balancing permitted of course. I believe that there would be a lot of strategic value in this game-mode. There are some really skilled players out there who would rather prefer to read their opponents rather than cap points.

JonPeters.5630:

As we have stated many times we have tried many modes and there is a reason we ended up where we did. This is not to say we will not introduce new modes at some point, however a few notes on death match.

1) You can obviously have it without a healer.
2) Even games people consider to be DM have tons of secondary objectives (Quake 3, counter strike, Starcraft, etc.)
3) Objective based games tend to be both more total noob friendly AND more esport observer friendly as players/watchers can go/look at where the action will likely be.

Deathmatch without other objectives lacks things like a reason to engage, a way to break stalemates, and a tie breaker. It also creates much wider blowouts when someone on your team doesn’t know what they are doing (does this ever happen to you that you get a clueless teammate? Heh)

Hopefully that clears up some of our reasoning for future discussions.

Jon

While I agree with what you said.
On that note of secondary objectives what happened to that talk about changing some of their worths that you guys spoke about before. Such as Lord killing in foefire or the Forest bosses?

JonPeters.5630:

As we have stated many times we have tried many modes and there is a reason we ended up where we did. This is not to say we will not introduce new modes at some point, however a few notes on death match.

1) You can obviously have it without a healer.
2) Even games people consider to be DM have tons of secondary objectives (Quake 3, counter strike, Starcraft, etc.)
3) Objective based games tend to be both more total noob friendly AND more esport observer friendly as players/watchers can go/look at where the action will likely be.

Deathmatch without other objectives lacks things like a reason to engage, a way to break stalemates, and a tie breaker. It also creates much wider blowouts when someone on your team doesn’t know what they are doing (does this ever happen to you that you get a clueless teammate? Heh)

Hopefully that clears up some of our reasoning for future discussions.

Jon

Well, hopefully you guys stray FAR away from the current conquest style mode you have. The game would be much funner with a better(see funner) match style.