Guild Wars 2

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

So to clarify the thought behind:

1. Must be able to be hot join-able

One thing we really want to do is promote and grow the player base. Now, what does that mean? When a new player (either to PvP or to the game) joins PvP for the first time they go to custom arenas to play and learn the game in a less competitive environment. We want those players to retain and work their way up to the competitive game modes: Solo or Team queue. So the meaning behind that statement is that the game mode must work for both casual and competitive environments to help grow the community.

Tbh, this is not really how it works. I see a lot of beginners stumbling around in solo arenas, and I bet it would be the same with team arena if not for the fact that the queue takes forever solo.
Ever since you lifted the restrictions on tournaments (no more tickets needed), more and more new players start with arena instead of hotjoin games. Resulting in a lot of friction. This then results in new players quitting spvp after one or two tries and old players quitting because of… well.. exactly the same and some more.

If you really would want new players to start with hotjoins, you should restrict access again. Or you could finally implement a matchmaking system that doesnt put new players against or with spvp pros.

More complicated game modes could be easily implemented as a new kind of spvp arena, maybe including some kind of dummy arena to test it with explanations (mandatory tutorial). The way spvp is atm, its quite unimaginatively solved.
You are constantly saying that you want to attract new players, but then you leave it to the community to educate those new players, but the community is quite honestly, fed up with that.

If you want to keep old players, you HAVE to add new and more complicated game modes. But with the current system you CANT add them, because new players will destroy any kind of enjoyment old players could get out of those. Imo that’s exactly the kind of conundrum you have to solve, asap, or you will continue loosing players, until spvp in gw2 looks like FA in gw1 nowadays.

First time logging in since about a year. Devs are talking now? That’s outstanding!…..

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Lost-potential/first

*By the way, that was written a month after release.. pity it got locked, crazy productive thread IMO.

The Lost Witch.7601:

Strategy based PvP

Of course, team arena PvP is already based on strategy, but I want a game mode that takes this to another level. Moba gameplay does this in a way, by having many more strategic choices available after the game has started.

It has some elements of WvW in it, but doesn’t last a week/allow for obscene stat advantages.

The main problem with Hugh’s 4 guidelines would lie in the 15 minute duration of the match.

The pace of the game could be a bit too high at 15 minutes, to really make use of strategical plans. Since I imagine it would require players to communicate through chat and invest time in building up tactical advantages. I suggest doubling this to 30 minutes.

Players could join late, but teamswapping like in solo-que is a no-go.

Ingredients with bulletpoints

• Partially moba, lots of npcs, items and structures, but no leveling/skill development.
• Match is won by killing the enemy lord/destroying their castle.
• A new currency (platinum?) only to be used within the match. Players can decide to add platinum to the upgrade fund or spend it themself.
• Large map.
• Pre-fight strategy discussion time. 1 or 2 minutes could be enough.
• A slow start, working towards the peak of the action… the endgame.
• A large emphasis on secondary objectives.
• Tactical dilemmas come up frequently.
• Good use of the environment has to be important.
• Roles for scouts/skirmishers. Knowing what the enemy is up to is vital.
• NPC´s are important in preparing for the endgame.
• As we near the end of the match, respawn timers are high. (Perhaps each death increases the timer, perhaps it increases regularly by x seconds per minute)

More bulletpoints.

NPCs

• Monsters can be slain for buffs/environmental weapons/platinum/other goals.
• Guards will patrol the area of your keep, much like in WvW.
• A force of guards is send out every now and then to attack the enemy castle. (And kill any enemy guards on the way)

Upgrades

Paid for with platinum gained from completing bounties/killing enemies/running errands. These would be the GW2 version of leveling up in a moba style game.

• Guard slaying (5 ranks): +10 to +50% damage vs NPC’s/ -10 to -50% damage taken from NPC’s.
• Reinforcements: 1 extra NPC with every patrol spawned.
• Guard strength: guards are now level 81/82.
• Gate upgrades: stronger gates.
• Etc.

Buffs

These would be the equivalent of items in a moba. They are purchased with platinum from vendors that spawn on the map

Team wide buff ideas:

• Essence of celerity: +20% endurance regen + 20% movement speed.
• Grail of might: +200 vitality + 1 stack of might (15 seconds) every 5 seconds.
• Armor of salvation: +200 toughness + minor health regeneration.

Individual buff ideas:

• Vampiric attacks
• Speed buff
• Instant skill recharge of all your skills at a certain vendor/boss.
• Etc.

Environmental weapons

These can be found in remote areas of the map. Perhaps bought or dropped by a monster. They are one-use items. Typically best saved for end-game clashes.

• Bell. 4 second AoE daze.
• Spicy kittentail. 10 second AoE burning spot. (Like the WvW mortar fire)
• Dust. 10 seconds AoE stealth.
• Etc.

Environmental advantages

• A plateau, so high that it kills you when you’re pushed off unless you have a falling trait.
• Underground sneak paths with potential cave-ins.
• Terrain that can be transformed through upgrades. Say, made into a minefield.
• Chokepoints
• NPC wardens that require a fee for passing through their lair allowing for a shortcut.

Well… I guess you get the idea.

TL/DR version:

Some ingredients from moba style gameplay, but without leveling. And less of a focus on ‘laning’. Some ingredients from WvW.

Most important features: building towards a critical end-game. Lots of tactical decisions are made on the way there. The match changes drastically from start to finish. The impact of strategy makes matches surprising and different from other matches.

Something like this would be fantastic.
Obviously it doesn’t have to be exactly like this, but this really does add in a lot of the the mechanics of GW2 that make it really fun. Remember this is an MMO and straight up trying to make it into a MOBA won’t work. We have to work on what we have here and make it as good and entertaining as possible.

hotjoin doesnt help me learn the game, and its because i can join in at any point in the game and just do whatever i want.

if you made me play a full game every time, i would be much better off.

Hot Join is ok in some respects, as it allows you to jump straight in without having to wait in a queue. Another advantage to hot joinable games is when players leave a match mid way through, as it allows other players to fill those empty slots. However, I do not think hot join should be a defining factor in whether you create a game mode or not, which is the impression I got from Hugh.

Hot join should merely be a connection option, one that can be added to ANY game. I am struggling to find any reason why any of the ideas suggested in this thread cannot be made hot joinable.

I feel that If you want MOBA go play the 10 games purely dedicated to MOBA.. i don’t think i can get the same enjoyment from gw2MOBA when i can load up LOL, Dota etc.

lets first focus on making this game generally enjoyable within the guildwars genre.

Who needs MOBA type new pvp mode if we could have asuraball

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Gamemode-Asura-Ball

Rin.1046:

Another advantage to hot joinable games is when players leave a match mid way through

anet has to teach players that this is unacceptable behavior, not promote it by putting it in the mode that is supposed to serve as a tutorial for competitive modes

RA or TA deathmatch mode BUT no double profession in each team you guys shud test 3v3 or 5v5 and which do u think is better and easier to watch and make a map for deathmatch mode balance for melees and range classes (pls no to skyhammer thing)

And if a player is downed for the 2nd time = instant dead

insanemaniac.2456:

Rin.1046:

Another advantage to hot joinable games is when players leave a match mid way through, as it allows other players to fill those empty slots.

anet has to teach players that this is unacceptable behavior, not promote it by putting it in the mode that is supposed to serve as a tutorial for competitive modes

Firstly, why did you only take half of my sentence? The second half of that sentence clearly shows the advantage of hot join and that is to reduce the negative impact that leaving players (through choice or not) can have on the remaining players.

Secondly, you will never stop players leaving bad matches. It really doesn’t matter whether a game is hot join or not, if a player wants to leave a bad match they will leave the bad match. So in my opinion it is far better to have a hot join system to help reduce the impact this can have on the other players.

So while I agree with you that this behaviour needs to be reduced or stopped somehow, I do not agree that removing hot join is the best solution. If anything it will only make the situation worse.

Rin.1046:

insanemaniac.2456:

Rin.1046:

Another advantage to hot joinable games is when players leave a match mid way through, as it allows other players to fill those empty slots.

anet has to teach players that this is unacceptable behavior, not promote it by putting it in the mode that is supposed to serve as a tutorial for competitive modes

Firstly, why did you only take half of my sentence? The second half of that sentence clearly shows the advantage of hot join and that is to reduce the negative impact that leaving players (through choice or not) can have on the remaining players.

Secondly, you will never stop players leaving bad matches. It really doesn’t matter whether a game is hot join or not, if a player wants to leave a bad match they will leave the bad match. So in my opinion it is far better to have a hot join system to help reduce the impact this can have on the other players.

So while I agree with you that this behaviour needs to be reduced or stopped somehow, I do not agree that removing hot join is the best solution. If anything it will only make the situation worse.

because its the only portion that matters. when players are encouraged to leave games at will, they do, and they wreck the experience of whoever else is in the game. if hotjoin was deleted and solo queue took over as the introduction, we would be better off, because at least there is dishonor for leavers. like, if it was all the same people that play hotjoin, the “for funzies” crowd that zergs a point and just kittens around all game. at least they would be a little more encouraged to see it through to the end of the match.

how exactly would removing it make the situation worse? im under the impression that there isnt a big enough experienced community to support both a solo queue and a team queue, and the largely uneducated masses just gravitate to hotjoin primarily because its instantaneous. so 3 queues is too many. get rid of the one that encourages bad behavior, and make solo queue more accessible and more promoted.

joining/leaving in the middle of a match is a terrible way to play any competitive game.

One game mode mentioned is FFA, I want to expand on that.

We can try to minimize build dominance by playing with the map. One thing I had in mind was a FFA-Deathmatch game mode similar to quake with random map buffs that have a dramatic effect. Another idea is to build a labyrinth map or darkness map similar to the guild mission/jumping puzzle to create some guerrilla dynamics.

In my opinion it’s too difficult to to design balanced, yet flavorful skills in PvP. Why not change the focal point of PvP from skill (as in character skill) based to more map based?

insanemaniac.2456:

because its the only portion that matters.

How is it the only portion that matters? How is reducing the negative impact on the remaining players not a point worth noting? I think you are missing the bigger picture here and only looking at the players leaving and not the consequences.

Hot join is designed to accomplish two things:

1. Allow players who just want a quick ‘kick about’ to jump into a game without having to wait.
2. Reduce the negative impact of early leavers by allowing other players to quickly fill their slot.

when players are encouraged to leave games at will, they do, and they wreck the experience of whoever else is in the game. if hotjoin was deleted and solo queue took over as the introduction, we would be better off, because at least there is dishonor for leavers. like, if it was all the same people that play hotjoin, the “for funzies” crowd that zergs a point and just kittens around all game. at least they would be a little more encouraged to see it through to the end of the match.

Hot join does NOT encourage players to leave a game. You might argue that it removes the consequences, but lets be honest with ourselfs here, do you really think these kinds of players really care whether they have to start a match from the start or not? All they care about is not continuing a bad match, or not losing. It really doesn’t matter one bit if there is no hot join, there will still be players who leave early.

Players in solo and team queue tend to be more serious PvP so there are less early leavers, it has nothing to do with how easy it is to connect. If anything having hot join keeps these players out of the more serious competitive matches. Which brings me on to the next point:

how exactly would removing it make the situation worse? im under the impression that there isnt a big enough experienced community to support both a solo queue and a team queue, and the largely uneducated masses just gravitate to hotjoin primarily because its instantaneous. so 3 queues is too many. get rid of the one that encourages bad behavior, and make solo queue more accessible and more promoted.

joining/leaving in the middle of a match is a terrible way to play any competitive game.

If you re-read your own post you have countered your own arguement. Yes, there are a lot of inexperienced players in PvP, thats what you get when you have a lot of players in a game, and MMO’s tend to have lots of players. You will never change that, there will always be more inexperienced players than experienced. And the ‘for funzies’ as you call them will always want the ability to quickly jump in and out of matches because they are not as invested as the more experienced and dedicated PvPers.

That doesn’t always mean they are bad players, it just means they have different priorities to you. It’s their game too don’t forget, not just yours.

So to answer your question, how does it make it worse: By removing hot join you will force all the ‘for funzies’ and inexperienced players into solo and team queue which will achieve one or both of the following:

1. These players will start to leave these more competitive matches, frustration the more dedicated players and potentially ruining the sPvP side of the game.
2. New players will not enjoy this more strict system and will get put off PvP all together (something Anet does not want and not something to encourage new players to grow).

By having solo, team and hot join, you have two modes for the more dedicated PvP players and one mode for players to learn the basics and just to have fun. By removing the hot join you force everyone into the same games and that will cause issues.

I can understand your frustration, I really can. But you have to remember that there are always going to be leavers in games, and hot join is NOT making it easier for them. It may be removing the consequences, but lets be honest, a lot of these early leavers couldn’t care less about the consequences. They will have done it anyway. However, hot join DOES reduce the negative impact on other players (a good thing) and it does provide a (seperate) avenue for these players to play without it effecting the more serious players too much (another good thing).

Anyway, I think we are venturing off topic slightly here, so I will leave it there and let others decide what is right for the game. But at the end of the day it is something Anet is supporting and I agree with them on this, even though I do not agree with them on the idea it should govern what future modes we have.

I’d love to see some sort of Free For All:

1. 20-30 Players on a map about the size of the old GW1 Alliance Battle maps.

2. All players start in the same place, but are invulnerable. They can then use teleporters to take them to different parts of the map. Teleporting offers about 5-10 seconds of invulnerability to avoid campers.

3. Defeated players are returned to the starter area.

4. First to X amount of points wins.

5. Points are scored by defeating other players or completing other objectives spread out across the map.
-the other objectives would be thinks like carrying supply from one point to another or channeling a point. Things that could be easily disrupted by other players.

6. A few hidden (temporary) buffs could be found throughout the map, similar to the Dragon Arena during the Dragon Bash.

Rin.1046:

snippity cuz length, but @ the whole post in general

look at league of legends:

-playerbase in the 100k’s
-leaving is not tolerated

yes people troll and kitten with you if they get mad, but leavers get banned very quickly. and the tribunal is there for the rest of the bad behavior.

we do not have to tolerate leaving, and anet should not tolerate it. if we can at least set the ground rules of “finish the game you started,” dumping the funzies crowd into solo queue by default will not be as much of an issue as you fear, and it will in fact smooth out the curve for games. more people in a queue = larger playerbase to draw games for = more well defined rating layers and better game quality.

when the global tournament streams draw like 3k players, you do not have a large enough community to split it between a lot of queues and game quality suffers if you do.

league can support about 8 or 10 queues because they have a playerbase about 2 orders of magnitude larger than gw2.

and also, we need to sell each match as a package deal. they dont take more than 10 minutes each anyways, its not like mobas where the average game length is 30-50 mins. anet needs to get the community to accept that sometimes we lose instead of trying to appease everyone all the time. every sport has a winner and a loser, because someone is always better than someone else. trying to sell a game mode that includes losing sometimes as part of the package by saying “well you can quit if you start losing” is a terrible idea and something no salesman would ever say. and thats why hotjoin is cancer.

You bring up a good point, insanemaniac, but I have a suggested solution to this problem without removing hot join completely, because I do feel the benefits are worth keeping (i.e, reduced impact on remaining players and no/little queues).

So, you can still hot join as normal, however, if you leave a match early you are given the leaver debuff for 24 hours. With this debuff active your account is locked out of all PvP matches and you can only play custom arena’s if it is flagged for no progression. Alternatively, while you have the Leaver debuff you can still play, but gain no progression of any kind for 24 hours.

The tough call to make here though is that players who are unfortunate to lose connection, due to a network problem for instance, will be punished also. However, hopefully they will not be as many and at least this way they will still be able to play some PvP, even if it means they cannot progress for a day.

They could even implement some kind of frequent offender penalty, whereby if a player keeps leaving matches, after their debuff has ended, they get marked and their debuff duration increased by a further 24 hours each time. But to ensure players with bad connections are not punished, there could be a period after which this mark will be removed.

I do see your point regarding the effect early leavers can have on the state of PvP, and I do agree that bad behaviour needs to be discouraged as best as possible, I just feel that having the ability to jump straight into a match is a good thing to have, so I would rather they find a way to enable us to have the best of both worlds. Allow quick join, but discourage early leaving.

One thing to note here, is that players who only do PvP for fun, will get bored of queueing very quickly, so having this quick jump in system is a good thing to have. Especially when we do have other options for the more serious PvPers (solo and team q). But yes, bad behaviour does need to be discouraged, even in hot join matches.

For the love of god, please let there be a game mode where downstate is disabled.

If you die, you die. None of this nonsensical stomping. I beat you, period. I can’t even properly 2v1 when I finally down 1 person and the other guy just pushes me off from stomp and just rezzes who I killed…. such a lousy mechanic I can’t believe after nearly 2 years this is still in PvP…there is absolutely no other game with this kind of silly and useless mechanic.

There’s quite a few reasons why gw2 will never ever be considered an e-sport, and this is one of them. absolutely terrible downed system in PvP, has no place here. At least introduce a game mode without it.

I just had another thought on a new idea for conquest. I, like I am sure a lot of people, used to love playing Battlefield 2142. In BF2142 you took control of missile silos (capture points), which then proceeded to attack the enemy drop ship.

I feel that this kind of mechanic could be added to the conquest mode to make things a little more interesting and provide a more defined goal, beyond gathering points. Each capture point could perhaps weaken a shield surrounding the home base, then once that shield is down the base lord must be defeated to win the match. Points could still be used in the event that the time runs out with each team holding an equal amount of capture points.

It had a great feeling in BF2142, where for the first part of the battle it was a constant struggle to maintain control of the missiles, but once the shield was down it was a mad frantic rush (for both sides) to fight onboard the ship. It was an awesome change of pace and direction that, for me, kept the mode fun for a good time. The other factor was the ability to move the drop ship to different positions, which offered players a unique tactical decision I had not see in other FPS games before.

If Anet could change conquest in this way I think more players would be interested in it.

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

I am really loving the discussion going on in this thread. This is a testament to how awesome our community is! Alright so now that we have flushed out some ideas let me give you some guide lines and let me know if we can design around it.

1. Must be able to be hot join-able
* Not easily griefed and allow players to be able to jump in and out
2. Must fit the 5 on 5 standard
3. Can fit our standard PvP match time (15 mins)
4. (Would Be Nice) Shout castable

Alright let me know how your ideas fit or change with these standards.

No! Why do you have to limit yourselves to a 5v5 standard? That’s an awful idea!

What I would enjoy the most is a 2v2 or 3v3 arena game mode and a more relaxed, large scale game mode with around 30 players. Not only do I think that these kind of game modes would be very enjoyable, but the difference in team sizes between game modes would make it feel as we would get an even greater diversity of game modes in PvP, on top of the diversity that comes with a larger quantity of game modes (Just having 1 is beyond ridiculous; it is tragic.)

Although, that’s just my opinion, but the general idea to just stick with a team size of 5 through all game modes is probably objectively a very bad one?

Phadde.7362:

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

I am really loving the discussion going on in this thread. This is a testament to how awesome our community is! Alright so now that we have flushed out some ideas let me give you some guide lines and let me know if we can design around it.

1. Must be able to be hot join-able
* Not easily griefed and allow players to be able to jump in and out
2. Must fit the 5 on 5 standard
3. Can fit our standard PvP match time (15 mins)
4. (Would Be Nice) Shout castable

Alright let me know how your ideas fit or change with these standards.

No! Why do you have to limit yourselves to a 5v5 standard? That’s an awful idea!

What I would enjoy the most is a 2v2 or 3v3 arena game mode and a more relaxed, large scale game mode with around 30 players. Not only do I think that these kind of game modes would be very enjoyable, but the difference in team sizes between game modes would make it feel as we would get an even greater diversity of game modes in PvP, on top of the diversity that comes with a larger quantity of game modes (Just having 1 is beyond ridiculous; it is tragic.)

Although, that’s just my opinion, but the general idea to just stick with a team size of 5 through all game modes is probably objectively a very bad one?

+1 to this in general, if you went the the trouble of making a MOBA, a 3v3 option would make sense to me too.

Hugh Norfolk.2798:

I am really loving the discussion going on in this thread. This is a testament to how awesome our community is! Alright so now that we have flushed out some ideas let me give you some guide lines and let me know if we can design around it.

1. Must be able to be hot join-able
* Not easily griefed and allow players to be able to jump in and out
2. Must fit the 5 on 5 standard
3. Can fit our standard PvP match time (15 mins)
4. (Would Be Nice) Shout castable

Alright let me know how your ideas fit or change with these standards.

I think your approach is the opposite of what the community wants.

We need to establish a competitive environment
as well as making new players enjoy pvp.
We can only bind people to a new game mode if it has actual ,,depth’’.

If we make the game mode hotjoinable
we spread out the community over hundreds of servers
and will never evolve a solid core tht attracts other people.

The majority, at least I have this appreciation after reading the forums for past 2 years,
wishes to have a non capture point game mode based on small scale fights like 3vs3 in spvp or large scale fights (Guild vs Guild) in WvW. So why don’t we just hand it to them?

Don’t base your game around the 5vs5 standart.
The 2vs2 or 3vs3 ESL Tournements are way more exciting to watch.

I have no objection to smaller scale game modes (2v2, 3v3), but I would also like to add that I am sure I am not alone in saying I would like to see some larger scale game modes too.

Also, not everyone wants plain straight up fighting. Some of us want objectives to fight over. While the capture point system may not appeal to all it will appeal to some. The problem we have in GW2 though is that conquest is the ONLY system we have. We have custom arenas but we really need some more set game modes to jump into.

Give us straight up death matches, king of the hill, assault, siege, FA style matches, VIP escort games, BF 2142 conquest style with mobile bases. Give us small 2v2 & 3v3 maps, give us large 16v16, 32v32 & 64v64 maps if possible. Give us as many options as you possibly can. Just don’t keep it to only conquest, or only 5v5, or only 15 minute matches. Players want options because not every player enjoys the same thing.

I understand that we cannot have all those things I listed, but I really feel we need more than what we have now, and not just in terms of the map type.

Strategy based PvP
Of course, team arena PvP is already based on strategy, but I want a game mode that takes this to another level. Moba gameplay does this in a way, by having many more strategic choices available after the game has started.
It has some elements of WvW in it, but doesn’t last a week/allow for obscene stat advantages.
The main problem with Hugh’s 4 guidelines would lie in the 15 minute duration of the match.
The pace of the game could be a bit too high at 15 minutes, to really make use of strategical plans. Since I imagine it would require players to communicate through chat and invest time in building up tactical advantages. I suggest doubling this to 30 minutes.
Players could join late, but teamswapping like in solo-que is a no-go.
Ingredients with bulletpoints
Partially moba, lots of npcs, items and structures, but no leveling/skill development.
Match is won by killing the enemy lord/destroying their castle.
A new currency (platinum?) only to be used within the match. Players can decide to add platinum to the upgrade fund or spend it themself.
Large map.
Pre-fight strategy discussion time. 1 or 2 minutes could be enough.
A slow start, working towards the peak of the action… the endgame.
A large emphasis on secondary objectives.
Tactical dilemmas come up frequently.
Good use of the environment has to be important.
Roles for scouts/skirmishers. Knowing what the enemy is up to is vital.
NPC´s are important in preparing for the endgame.
As we near the end of the match, respawn timers are high. (Perhaps each death increases the timer, perhaps it increases regularly by x seconds per minute)
More bulletpoints.
NPCs
Monsters can be slain for buffs/environmental weapons/platinum/other goals.
Guards will patrol the area of your keep, much like in WvW.
A force of guards is send out every now and then to attack the enemy castle. (And kill any enemy guards on the way)
Upgrades
Paid for with platinum gained from completing bounties/killing enemies/running errands. These would be the GW2 version of leveling up in a moba style game.
Guard slaying (5 ranks): +10 to +50% damage vs NPC’s/ -10 to -50% damage taken from NPC’s.
Reinforcements: 1 extra NPC with every patrol spawned.
Guard strength: guards are now level 81/82.
Gate upgrades: stronger gates.
Etc.
Buffs
These would be the equivalent of items in a moba. They are purchased with platinum from vendors that spawn on the map
Team wide buff ideas:
Essence of celerity: +20% endurance regen + 20% movement speed.
Grail of might: +200 vitality + 1 stack of might (15 seconds) every 5 seconds.
Armor of salvation: +200 toughness + minor health regeneration.
Individual buff ideas:
Vampiric attacks
Speed buff
Instant skill recharge of all your skills at a certain vendor/boss.
Etc.
Environmental weapons
These can be found in remote areas of the map. Perhaps bought or dropped by a monster. They are one-use items. Typically best saved for end-game clashes.
Bell. 4 second AoE daze.
Spicy kittentail. 10 second AoE burning spot. (Like the WvW mortar fire)
Dust. 10 seconds AoE stealth.
Etc.
Environmental advantages
A plateau, so high that it kills you when you’re pushed off unless you have a falling trait.
Underground sneak paths with potential cave-ins.
Terrain that can be transformed through upgrades. Say, made into a minefield.
Chokepoints
NPC wardens that require a fee for passing through their lair allowing for a shortcut.
Well… I guess you get the idea.
TL/DR version:
Some ingredients from moba style gameplay, but without leveling. And less of a focus on ‘laning’. Some ingredients from WvW.
Most important features: building towards a critical end-game. Lots of tactical decisions are made on the way there. The match changes drastically from start to finish. The impact of strategy makes matches surprising and different from other matches.

Holy Crap! Anet, hire this guy! Yes, this would be awesome. The only thing I could think of adding would be the ability to add traps upon purchasing them. Again, look to what others are doing successfully and improve upon it. Look at Wildstar’s WarPlots.

Hugh Norfolk.2798:
I am really loving the discussion going on in this thread. This is a testament to how awesome our community is! Alright so now that we have flushed out some ideas let me give you some guide lines and let me know if we can design around it.
1. Must be able to be hot join-able

• Not easily griefed and allow players to be able to jump in and out
  2. Must fit the 5 on 5 standard
  3. Can fit our standard PvP match time (15 mins)
  4. (Would Be Nice) Shout castable
  Alright let me know how your ideas fit or change with these standards.

1. is upsetting. Let’s break out of the 5v5 mold and bring on the 2v2, 3v3, and 5v5 deathmatch arenas we all know and love from WoW and Wildstar. SWTOR screwed it up with only 5v5 deathmatch arenas. Learn from the successes and mistakes of others! Anet, you have a community that has begged for this for a long time!

1. 2v2, 3v3, 5v5 deathmatch arenas with a variety of maps.
2. Dueling
3. Allow for the acquisition of Legendary Weapons and Ascended gear through ranked rewards earned from Ranked Arenas. Employ the ranking system WoW used to have in order to purchase such weapons and gear. This would seriously create a huge amount of PvP competition and Player desire. Your Tourney of Legends is nice, but unreachable to most players. A 2v2 team that has earned the rank of 2800 (old WoW lingo for example) should have the option to buy a Legendary and ascended gear with either Gold (not thousands of gold, but much cheaper than TP) or PvP currency (I know, Glory is dead).

Can we get a response, Hugh? Please. :-)

Just a response to all that has been said since your last post on this thread. Thank you.

Rather than normal Moba, I’d like a labyrinth type of map that has a lord each team protects and constantly changing scenarios, a little randomness, like pathways changing or shutting. This would make it so almost everyone on offense, except maybe one to stay behind and defend the lord. Yet, it would prevent zerging because if they did the whole team would be hitting a dead-end due to navigation errors or changing scenarios.

Rather than normal Moba, I’d like a labyrinth type of map that has a lord each team protects and constantly changing scenarios, a little randomness, like pathways changing or shutting. This would make it so almost everyone on offense, except maybe one to stay behind and defend the lord. Yet, it would prevent zerging because if they did the whole team would be hitting a dead-end due to navigation errors or changing scenarios.

OMG, this idea is awesome! I would like to see this in addition to a moba style game and of course 2v2, 3v3, 5v5 death match arenas. I also think we should be able to only purchase certain types of gear and weapons, mostly ascended and legendary if you have an arena rating high enough.

kirito.4138:

Skeub.6740:

• Random Arena : Pretty much like soloQ but instead of leaving after the map you won you stay with the people you had and continue to win, the more you win the more you have points (for RA title) and loot with a max of 25 consecutives wins, you can also leave after one game if you don’t like the party and you’ll find a last while it’s looking for your next opponent.
  RA Wiki

Sounds great on paper, but with the low population now that would be horrible. The losing team will be scattered then reformed to fight the same team they can’t beat. It be almost as bad as when sync queuing was a thing.

It was exactly the same in GW1 and it worked fine. RA was the most popular PvP mode.

i got two idea my first would be alliance battles from gw factions (with slight changes like once a team got 500 points the enemy gate openes and you can channel the enemy respawner which will lead to a 12 v 12 deathmatch if both spawners are shut down)
surely you could do this with any amount of layers on each side if you have a big pool of maps to choose from depending on the players playing
i think this game mode is highly entertaining since capping points is important holding as well..not letting your enemy getting these points also

but ..
if one team (experienced wvw guild) always keps on zerging and the enemy team reaching 500faster ..but the wvw team not dieing..
it could become ..interesting since you need at some point to win a fight.. otherwise it wont end well for you xD

second idea fort asperwood
5 v 5 able
hot join.. meh not so much
you would have to wait like in gw1..

“fort asperwood is unfair always attackers/defenders win”
just make it 1 attacker round and 1 defender round…

if its in the 15min time frame depends on how quick the turtles (dolyaks) move how much hp the gates have
how easy you can repair the gates
and how much hp gunther got
also if dolyaks were attackable attackers in the defender team and defenders in attack team would be usefull.. (good for “hot” joins)
which means a balanced team (with high mobility if u want to repair) would be necessarry for tournaments

the team that killed faster / dfended gunther for longer (which will be the same team)
will get the winner reward

i dont know i think a moba style game would be fun..
but a truly nightmare to balance
just because the classes are so different to each other
even if anet tries to ONLY buff/debuff the ingame moab equipment buffs foods and so on …it just wouldnt work out i think

however the general idea is something i like

not the idea of killing getting money and experience to become so strong that no player has any chance against me..
i like the idea of npcs rushing into each other and you help your npcs to progress thus supporty builds would become a bit more viable
i dont know if u still can call it a moba gameplay if u have no buffs or anything u unlock..
well.. there could be a couple of buffs on the way …but not too many at max 1minute +25 on each stats
you will most likely only get it if you have pushed your enemy faar away back to his base so your team does make progress..
or have even killed him.. which would mean great progress
(instead of killing gives +5 killing could give the whole team 1minute +25on each stat actually.. )
the questin is who would win if after 15minutes no lord goes down?

depend it on kills?
on buffs collected (if u choose to get one with some minor buffs +100toughness / vitality would be possible as well)

i just cant see gw2 become a moba style game fitting on compettitive niveau
it surely would be fun though..

Soinetwa.5193:

i just cant see gw2 become a moba style game fitting on compettitive niveau
it surely would be fun though..

I think this is a point worth noting, but would also lke to expand on it. I too agree that some game modes are not that good for tournaments and high level competitive play. However, I do not feel that all game modes HAVE to be like this. What is wrong with having a couple of ‘for fun’ modes? After that, if a mode becomes very popular THEN try to work some kind of tournament or competitive system into it.

Having modes that are considered more casual are a good thing to have, they introduce new players to PvP and allow them a fun way to polish their skills. Then once they feel more confident and wish to play something more high level, they can then progress on to other modes.

The key factor here is variety. Having more modes to cater for various play styles and attitudes will help to improve the PvP aspect of the game. Not only will it make things more casual and new player friendly, but it will filter the player base into their preferred game types to allow players in each mode to find like minded PvP players faster. It’s like offering a sandwich to everyone and giving them a choice of different fillings, what happens to those who hate/can’t eat bread? Or to those who prefer a salad? We are all different and like different things, so variety is important for a game that strives to have as many players as possible.

Map mechanics are not enough to make us feel like we have different modes. We need more variety in the main goal of each game, not a side bonus on each map of the only game mode. With only conquest available, you run the risk of alienate players who want something different and ultimately limit your PvP player base.

Nice discussion here but ANET isn’t going to do jack any time soon if they do decide to add a new mode to PVP. It takes them ages to even do balance updates so how long would you think it will take them to make new modes and balance around that? Yeah don’t get your hopes up.

Anet started this thread, so change is coming. How long will it take, who knows? Hugh, any input on this? At least tell us what you are thinking, while clearly stating nothing is written in stone. I’m very glad this thread is here and the Devs are listening. Thank you.

With that said, if people want more from this game at a quicker pace, and I’m one of those people, then we must acknowledge that this is a business. The primary purpose of business is profit. Period. Hence, there should be a subscription payment model similar to SWTOR. If you want quality, then you need to pay for it. Subscription + Gem Store + Expansion Packs = More content with a higher level of quality, which in turn leads to game longevity.

Note: expansion pack should not remove living story! Expansion only adds, not detracts!