Guild Wars 2

stronghold would be better with larger group than 5v5 imo.

with more players, more people can space out roles.

Make fights more interesting.

This is my hope to for custom arenas

+1

+1
The amount of things to do simultaneously breaks the 5 man cap but I would say 6-8 people would be better than 10.

Agree it would be really fun to try the mode as a 10v10. Only problem I see is the current map seems way too small for a 10v10, I’d love it if they had a slightly bigger map for that purpose.

i only suggested 10 because I think Anet’s system runs by 5’s and 10s. I can’t remember where but way back during beta someone mentioned it as a point versus 8’s when asked about gvg similar pvp

I constantly found myself fighting outnumbered. This was not due to my teammates being bad, but because there was so much going on at the same time, two heroes popping up, pushing offense and defense, running supplies etc. that it was too hard to communicate without ts. I think 10 v 10 would be great but not on the map they released. I think there needs to be more space between the objectives to curb zerging and to reward players who position successfully.

Another thought, i feel like the npcs are really weak vs. players, like archers and guards take no time for players to kill. They feel useless when you have a massive team fight in front of gates.

10v10 wouldn’t be fun. It would just be a clusterkitten.

Nyx.7342:

Another thought, i feel like the npcs are really weak vs. players, like archers and guards take no time for players to kill. They feel useless when you have a massive team fight in front of gates.

It’s PvP after all, players matter not NPCs

I think 10 might be just a touch too high, but 5v5 I agree turns into a lot of 1v1s all over the place with maybe 1 or 2 instances where the fights go 3v3+.

I feel like 8v8 might be a more suited number, there should be some form of punishment in terms of time running back without opposition.

I really don’t like 10v10 zerg fests.. or zerg fests in general… If i wanted that I’d play wvw

This would be great as 8v8

with 10 vs 10

break down of group:
1 on Treb
2 of Lord Defense
2 on Supply run
1 on Mist
1 on NPC escort/Horn finder
3 on offense push

thats fits for Stronghold map well.

I don’t think I would enjoy the mode in 10v10. The map is big yeah, 20 people for one map would be a bit too much.

Knighthonor.4061:

with 10 vs 10

break down of group:
1 on Treb
2 of Lord Defense
2 on Supply run
1 on Mist
1 on NPC escort/Horn finder
3 on offense push

thats fits for Stronghold map well.

Here’s the thing though, if you set up a PvP mode where your team can adequately attack or defend all objectives, it becomes a touch stale. Scarcity leads to strategy, if you brought that number down from 10 to 8 people, you will end up forcing actual Rotations much like what occurs at high rank play in Conquest, you create a better avenue not just for player skill but team skill!

Knighthonor.4061:

with 10 vs 10

break down of group:
1 on Treb
2 of Lord Defense
2 on Supply run
1 on Mist
1 on NPC escort/Horn finder
3 on offense push

thats fits for Stronghold map well.

No. It would make it worse for 2 reasons.

Game would time out more than it already will, and 10v10 would lead to zerging.

7v7 or 8v8 would be perfect. 10v10 is too much.

uhohhotdog.3598:

This would be great as 8v8

I bet the devs are smiling at this thread. Means so far this is well received.

JerryMain.4371:

Nyx.7342:

Another thought, i feel like the npcs are really weak vs. players, like archers and guards take no time for players to kill. They feel useless when you have a massive team fight in front of gates.

It’s PvP after all, players matter not NPCs

Thats true and im not a big fan of npcs but since theyre in the game mode i think they should serve a purpose.

One game i solo killed all the guards on the enemy team, and after we crushed their offense it was smooth sailing. I think the guards should be at least a little tougher to kill, (not super hard just a little harder) and i feel like the archers should also either get a little more health or more damage.

Laraley.7695:

I don’t think I would enjoy the mode in 10v10. The map is big yeah, 20 people for one map would be a bit too much.

full 20 wont be on offense or vice verse

Personall I think that 5v5 may be a tad small, but 10v10 would just be way too much. I’d say 6v6 would work well. Three for offense and three for defense.

hmm… 8 vs 8 for unranked and 6 vs 6 for ranked and possible 10 vs 10 for custom?

5 vs 5 is to small.

8v8 would be sweet.

Would bring some interesting team compositions.

Though that would likely mean a separate queue for Stronghold.

I think as 5v5 it can still work, though they should add in build templates and put courtyard and stronghold in the rotation for ranked but that is just my thing.

If they were going to increase the size for Stronghold though, I’m with the 8v8.

10 are too much in my opinion.
I found it now pretty nice, maybe 6vs6 would be better?

100% disagree.

Even with 5v5, stronghold is incredibly cluttered.

8v8 would be great.

Sykper.6583:

Knighthonor.4061:

with 10 vs 10

break down of group:
1 on Treb
2 of Lord Defense
2 on Supply run
1 on Mist
1 on NPC escort/Horn finder
3 on offense push

thats fits for Stronghold map well.

Here’s the thing though, if you set up a PvP mode where your team can adequately attack or defend all objectives, it becomes a touch stale. Scarcity leads to strategy, if you brought that number down from 10 to 8 people, you will end up forcing actual Rotations much like what occurs at high rank play in Conquest, you create a better avenue not just for player skill but team skill!

This. Would you like to be just “The Trebman” or just running with supplies back and forth for almost entire game? Nah, it’s boring.

Instead, there are multiple roles, places and actions avalible at the same time and you have to make good decisions with your team.

I am all for another beta to test different numbers of players, though.

No thank you. 5v5 seems about right. If I wanted a zerg, I’d go to wvw

Imagine yourself as that lord seeing enemy team with 10 Lichs or 10 Rampages or 70 Turrets inside of your room.

He would get heart attack before you even start attacking him.

Siva Mira.3546:

Imagine yourself as that lord seeing enemy team with 10 Lichs or 10 Rampages or 70 Turrets inside of your room.

He would get heart attack before you even start attacking him.

They need to increase their defense and reduce HP thenm it’s already very similar to a PvE run if they remain easy casual zerker friendly then PvE and SH will share meta. Increase each role value as well, the defensive lane seems inferior.

Yeah 8v8 feels right. 5v5 feels empty.

10 is IMHO way too much: Even 8v8 in GW1 was a lot for an e-Sport aspiring title with dedicated and organized teams. Ever tried to get 8 ppl organized to play together every day?

Even in the most hardcore-dedicated teams I’ve played in GW1 with top-20 worldwide GvG-finishes multiple seasons and pretty strict playtimes, there were hours upon hours of w8ing and sometimes even a need for substitutes involved.

I do like the Idea of a few more players though…. I’d probably go for 6v6, at the very maximum, 8v8.

I think that having more things to do than the available player is what makes this new map interesting. 10vs10 would mean that all roles are covered at the same time and strategic decision would be less important

Morkel.2039:

I think that having more things to do than the available player is what makes this new map interesting. 10vs10 would mean that all roles are covered at the same time and strategic decision would be less important

/agree

One of the interesting aspects is decision-making and setting priorities. Yes, it’s confusing right now, but once the mode is figured out more, it could create a very nice dynamic.

I still think that 6v6 would be okay though. ^^

Should make it 7v7 or 8v8… but you can only queue into it with a party of 5. So you always have 2-3 wildcards to “balance the matchmaking.”

huehue.

The game is about making choices, having a strat ready. By making 10v10 and covering every objective you lose quite a bit of that decisionmaking.

I’m ok with 5v5, the necessity to split creates much more small scale battles instead of too many people focusing on one thing and creating a spam fest (I’m looking on you mid point)

and as said, having more objectives puts a decision making into the gameplay, because you just can’t make everything at once… grouping up in the right moment will make a difference…

imagine one team trying to make final push resulting in a 10v10 fight in that small lord room, terrible…

MaXi.3642:

I’m ok with 5v5, the necessity to split creates much more small scale battles instead of too many people focusing on one thing and creating a spam fest (I’m looking on you mid point)

and as said, having more objectives puts a decision making into the gameplay, because you just can’t make everything at once… grouping up in the right moment will make a difference…

imagine one team trying to make final push resulting in a 10v10 fight in that small lord room, terrible…

Make it 7-8 players per team then.

Morkel.2039:

I think that having more things to do than the available player is what makes this new map interesting. 10vs10 would mean that all roles are covered at the same time and strategic decision would be less important

You mean like soccer, football, rugby are unorganizable zergfests with multiple players for the same role etc?!?

Need a larger map before we start raising the number of players. The map being used in this beta is good enough for 5v5. MAYBE 6v6. 10v10, IMHO, is too many for structured.

Halvorn.9831:

Morkel.2039:

I think that having more things to do than the available player is what makes this new map interesting. 10vs10 would mean that all roles are covered at the same time and strategic decision would be less important

You mean like soccer, football, rugby are unorganizable zergfests with multiple players for the same role etc?!?

Well he probably not know about many guilds in wvw able to organize every evening more than 20 players, and organizing scrim between opponent guild on the moment ^^
.
Aniway talking about the strategy in a 10v10 scenario, i think with this many numbers you would always need a leader telling who does that specific role in that specific situation, i see already chaotic rotations in a 5v5 scenario in normal pvp unranked games, with insults to people going far or beast at begin, not waiting for regroup etc…, doing an unranked 10v10 stronghold would be totaly random and increase the hate between players.

I think 10v10 would suit more for ranked and organized guilds, nor unranked.
Talking about the “coverage” of the many things you have to do in stronghold map, i believe too 5v5 is often driving people in 1v1 duels around the map, but i think this is also because of the actual meta builds, made for fighting in a circle and not for speed tactical movements. I think we would see more warrior GS able to run to one side to another of the map, or good usage of portals. So no definetely some build will have to be rewiew, i cant see a bow warrior running like a chiken not be able to do the necessary damage. Lets say maybe we will be all with roaming wvw builds^^.

So in conclusion, i enjoyed 5v5 unranked but yea it seems a little empty, but i think 10v10 should be add only in ranked or custom maps, forcing people organize in guilds or groups instead of running random team made on the moment with the perfect meta composition doesnt make everyone happy, especialy random players. Or well, if this is the problem, just give the option to chose the mode 10v10, 8v8 or 5v5.

Halvorn.9831:

Morkel.2039:

I think that having more things to do than the available player is what makes this new map interesting. 10vs10 would mean that all roles are covered at the same time and strategic decision would be less important

You mean like soccer, football, rugby are unorganizable zergfests with multiple players for the same role etc?!?

You have a point here, but I mean something a bit different.
If you have 10 people, leaving one at the treb will always be a good idea probably. Having a choice instead will add diversity to games, because sometimes there will be heavy treb game, sometimes no treb at all.
For sure, it is possible to have different strategies with 10vs10, but it will be more on the line of wich classes / how many classes do I use in the specific role, not which roles should be covered or not.

Shala.8352:

Well he probably not know about many guilds in wvw able to organize every evening more than 20 players, and organizing scrim between opponent guild on the moment ^^

I know wvwvw very well, but I am talking about a different layer of strategy, the one that you usually see on a RTS.

I think for the next beta test the limit should be increase to 6v6 solely to see. But to me 5v5 is great it is just players are new to the game mode.

Halvorn.9831:

Morkel.2039:

I think that having more things to do than the available player is what makes this new map interesting. 10vs10 would mean that all roles are covered at the same time and strategic decision would be less important

You mean like soccer, football, rugby are unorganizable zergfests with multiple players for the same role etc?!?

If you actually knew a thing about soccer you would know not every player is active at any moment. Part of football is realizing you have to stay in the field for 90 minutes and if you tried to be everywhere you be costing your team a substitute. Stronghold doesn’t have any of those limits, your character doesn’t get exhausted from being every where.

Rarely do you see goalies active in the front or defenders at the other team’s goal line. Thus even if you have 11v11 rarely are they more than 3v3 active at any given time, except during a corner kick.

silvermember.8941:

I think for the next beta test the limit should be increase to 6v6 solely to see. But to me 5v5 is great it is just players are new to the game mode.

Halvorn.9831:

Morkel.2039:

I think that having more things to do than the available player is what makes this new map interesting. 10vs10 would mean that all roles are covered at the same time and strategic decision would be less important

You mean like soccer, football, rugby are unorganizable zergfests with multiple players for the same role etc?!?

If you actually knew a thing about soccer you would know not every player is active at any moment. Part of football is realizing you have to stay in the field for 90 minutes and if you tried to be everywhere you be costing your team a substitute. Stronghold doesn’t have any of those limits, your character doesn’t get exhausted from being every where.

Rarely do you see goalies active in the front or defenders at the other team’s goal line. Thus even if you have 11v11 rarely are they more than 3v3 active at any given time, except during a corner kick.

Adding to that, Soccer, football and rugby players do not actually kill each other at least in their rule book. They play a totally different game.

Although I don’t think the sport most related to this seems organized.

I wanted to hint at something different.

If you have, say, 4 distinct roles one way is to say “ok, I have 3 players so you have to decide which role you give up at any particular point in time”. However you could also say “ok, i have 5 players so you have to decide which role you +1”.

I think that the second variant leads to more fights.

After around 20 SH games I actually changed my mind, and for this map size 5 vs 5 is really good. It create feel of dynamic in the match.

However I think Anet need seriously test SH and then based on this experience create new mode with bigger map for 10 vs 10 GvG and 5/5 vs 5/5 PUG play, where all 4 teams are premades but random to each other. Maybe with more gates and lanes to compensate zerg tactics.

+1

Consider 8v8.

This needs to be its own queue as well, please don’t mix with conquest!

Halvorn.9831:

I wanted to hint at something different.

If you have, say, 4 distinct roles one way is to say “ok, I have 3 players so you have to decide which role you give up at any particular point in time”. However you could also say “ok, i have 5 players so you have to decide which role you +1”.

I think that the second variant leads to more fights.

Fighting is a side effect of of trying to achieve the map objectives it is not the main objective. More fights is not necessarily good. Stronghold should not be Pure TDM map.

Personally, killing players should provide a very minimal amount of points since it leads to just zerging for points.

Arena net should test higher numbers but anything greater than 5v5 invaliates the need to bother with the mechanics. It instead becomes which team has the best dps and turns into a slightly bigger court yard.

crunchyraisin.6054:

This needs to be its own queue as well, please don’t mix with conquest!

This. I would like it to be a conscious decision to enter Stronghold mode (I would like this for court yard as well btw.)

Kraljevo.2801:

7v7 or 8v8 would be perfect. 10v10 is too much.

I totally agree. 7v7 or 8v8. 10v10 is too much, 5v5 not enough. Because like other mentionned, there are too many objectives to follow when you are only 5 players. You can’t defend npcs, gates and lord, eventually use treb, kill npcs, gather supplies, and kill other players effectively. You end up running alone many times excepted when the whole team goes at the lord, where finally all players go to attack/defend.

Even if you were doing something and you see your teammates need your help, you cannot usually run fast enough to be at the right place at the right moment. I’ve been destroyed in 3v1 few times, while being completely alone other times.

2-3 people more in each team whould be better since you could team-play a lot more imo. NPCs should however be slightly more resistant to support that dps income (not too much, game isn’t about NPCs, and there would be 2-3 other guys to defend them).

Also agree on the fact to put it in a different queue since it might demand different builds/equipments (or give us the BUILD SAVE AND SWITCH FUNCTION we want so much !!!).