Guild Wars 2

Would 4 vs 4 work better or worse than 3 vs 3 for WvW?

I’m asking just to get your opinion and it’s not a feature request. Please exclude from your answers the fact that the maps are not designed for 4v4.

In typical multiplayer games, 3vs mode works better, as 4vs mode tend to end up 2vs2 etc. And in that case it is obvious for the two strongets to ally to beat up the rest.

Granted, WvW is far from a typical multiplayer game.

Hmm, personally don’t see any purpose or benefit in going 4vs. Well, if they where to make new-maps it would theoretically be easier to make them symmetric/balanced.

(Considered making BL maps a pure 1vs1 ?, and keep EBG a 3vs ?)

In any scenario with 3 or more teams it will always result in the stronger ones pilling up on the weakest.

Jeknar.6184:

In any scenario with 3 or more teams it will always result in the stronger ones pilling up on the weakest.

I do tend to agree, but I also believe that a game could be designed around that problem. Which unfortunately GW2 has not. A very ham-handed example would be to say that you didn’t get any Points/wxp/reward xp for fighting against anything but the strongest opponent you got.

So Server A would only get rewards from fighting Server B, and B+C would only gain rewards from fighting Server A.

I don’t like that idea/design, but it would most likely work. Not to mention, once the blobs on stacked servers realize they don’t gain ANY rewards for sitting in the super blob

I don’t see what the point is. The game already has no incentive for the 2nd and 3rd place teams to focus on attacking the server in 1st place. How would 4v4 change that?

Jeknar.6184:

In any scenario with 3 or more teams it will always result in the stronger ones pilling up on the weakest.

Then change the scenario to be 4 teams.

1. Then Allow All teams to attack each other, but with limits on how many & which teams that players can attack. i.e. Allow Players to Attack 1 enemy team and after they’ve chosen…they can only attack that 1 enemy for the week. Luckily this limit can be changed weekly…as opposed to every 2 months…to keep Match-Ups lively.
2. Then Reward a lot more when attacking a team Ranked Higher than you
3. Then Reward a lot less when attacking a team Ranked Lower than you

Encourage & Reward players to “systematically” pile up & fight together against the Higher (Stronger) Ranked Team instead.

Our current WvW exists in a Tier based prison…imho

Blue Pill or Red Pill – The Matrix (2/9) Movie CLIP (1999) HD
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zE7PKRjrid4

For a Better Long Term Solution to WvW – Try a Google Search for – wvg world vs globes

Gudradain.3892:

Would 4 vs 4 work better or worse than 3 vs 3 for WvW?

I’m asking just to get your opinion and it’s not a feature request. Please exclude from your answers the fact that the maps are not designed for 4v4.

While, indeed, the current maps are not designed for 4v4 but this issue has everything to do with map design.

If you did not care about balance, and a consistent matchup, then yes you could have whatever team arrangements you wanted.

Once you break out of the 1v1 you start to lose flexibility in map design. 1v1 can be a line (or more) that bend to the designers whims as if it were a path to travel upon. You can achieve far more distinct combinations in this match up.

Beyond 1v1:

When you add in 3 teams, it forms a triangle, 4 would be a rectangle (assuming square is a type of rectangle), 5 would be a pentagon.

Attempting to Introduce Asymmetry:

These are shapes, they’re rigid, and cannot bend unless you’re willing to introduction asymmetry. The caveats of an asymmetrical map design mean you disrupt balance. However…

Research:

If you define W in WvW as a number, you can widen your perspective, and simulate this scenario in strategy games. In this case, I looked at Starcraft I maps here: http://classic.battle.net/scc/lp/3.shtml

TLDR: spoilers added for this reason. Read at your will!

game does not even support 3v3 lol.

The game mode always promotes going after the weakest team because of the point system, and so players always look for the easiest road to earn points and the win, human nature. No reason to add more teams to pile on even more on the weaker teams.