PvP Discussion: Game Modes

[Excell.1042]

@"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" one of the things that has always seemed kind of off to me is that you guys never communicated with us about a low man game mode in the first place, considering your combat system is heavily based around animations and reading them (which is what makes pve so good), i'd high consider looking into the options for 2v2 as an unranked queue atleast, as one of the big things that made conquest fail is that there were simply not enough ways to get a team together and skrim against other serious teams, 2v2 will need this and in my opinion would be able to make gw2 flourish, especially with the things previously stated by you.

[Morwath.9817]

When Quaggan thinks about game modes, he would love to have already mentioned by Ben 2v2, but:

* It should have a que;

* That que should be ranked que;

* That que should be premade only;

* That que should use different rating system, system where players should have separate rating for each team.

 

Why?

* It's super easy to build "premade" for 2v2, just pick a random friend in your friend list!

* Separate rating for each team is great to not disencourage people playing with their weaker friends, so if you decide to pick little fishy Quaggan and team up with him and you lose a game, because little fishy Quaggan is little and fishy, it won't affect your other teams rating, so why wouldn't you try to have some fun?

[zengara.8301]

2v2 is ok...

BUT 15 VS 15!!!!!!!! IF YOU DO THIS RIGHT, THIS WOULD BE A GAME CHANGER FOR MANY...MAAAAAANY PEOPLE

Do you know how many have left game, because no real GvG? If it is not some....Capture the flag B..S or small guild arenas.....or other weird random PvE stuff

..... Then you literally got GvG

***Edit.....Top Games Played Only PvP.....:.....::..:..:.:..:..Ppl dont want to press random buttons at random pve stuff for long...other ppl is where the fun is at

[Saiyan.1704]

> @"MADPIEMAN.8023" said:

> > @"BrokenGlass.9356" said:

> > So we have some common ideas in this thread.

> >

> > It looks like we can all agree that 3v3 is a great idea, and 2v2, while interesting, will be unbalanced.

> >

> > The majority of us want to be able to queue with our friends. So... Sorry vocal minority, but you guys are gonna have to take one for the team. (and really, when you encounter a pre-made as a solo queue... It's just a matter of "oh... All the same guild tag. Ok, I expect to loose, this is a training match." and is that so bad? Only if it's every match all night. And it never was even at the height of pre-made grouping.)

> >

> > 15v15 seems to excite everyone. And it sounds fun. But it's not spvp. This sounds like a game mode that is more connected to wvw than spvp. If you introduce this mode, I probably won't play it. Too much chaos. Same reason I don't play wvw.

> >

> > Deathmatch mode. Folks seem to keep suggesting this in connection with the 3v3 mode. I feel that 5v5 Deathmatch would be great. No teams, personal achievements only.

> >

> > I'm glad that the devs are asking... But I just don't buy the "too much risk" argument. You're trying to resurrect a dying game mode. Whatever you do has to be risky. And it has to be big.

> >

> > Build it and they will come.

> I think a dev said that 80% plus play solo so you are no the majority.

>

 

Say that to the Mesmer/Ranger/Thieves winners in every 1v1 tournament since 2012.... not to forget the numerous build bans for each class just to make it "balanced". It would be a heck of a lot more efficient to make a 3v3 arena match. Even 2v2's are more balanced.

[Saiyan.1704]

> @"Morwath.9817" said:

> When Quaggan thinks about game modes, he would love to have already mentioned by Ben 2v2, but:

> * It should have a que;

> * That que should be ranked que;

> * That que should be premade only;

> * That que should use different rating system, system where players should have separate rating for each team.

>

> Why?

> * It's super easy to build "premade" for 2v2, just pick a random friend in your friend list!

> * Separate rating for each team is great to not disencourage people playing with their weaker friends, so if you decide to pick little fishy Quaggan and team up with him and you lose a game, because little fishy Quaggan is little and fishy, it won't affect your other teams rating, so why wouldn't you try to have some fun?

 

Anyone who's played a competitive 2v2 team game mode would know that people leave their 2's team like flies. Sometimes, people don't want to go through the hassle of searching for a person just to queue casually. If that was the case, it would no longer be a casual game mode and _Casual_ is what Anet wants.

 

It's why AT's is perfect for 2's (or 3v3 c: ) because people can actually plan a few hours ahead of time for a partner.

[Morwath.9817]

> @"Saiyan.1704" said:

> > @"Morwath.9817" said:

> > When Quaggan thinks about game modes, he would love to have already mentioned by Ben 2v2, but:

> > * It should have a que;

> > * That que should be ranked que;

> > * That que should be premade only;

> > * That que should use different rating system, system where players should have separate rating for each team.

> >

> > Why?

> > * It's super easy to build "premade" for 2v2, just pick a random friend in your friend list!

> > * Separate rating for each team is great to not disencourage people playing with their weaker friends, so if you decide to pick little fishy Quaggan and team up with him and you lose a game, because little fishy Quaggan is little and fishy, it won't affect your other teams rating, so why wouldn't you try to have some fun?

>

> Anyone who's played a competitive 2v2 team game mode would know that people leave their 2's team like flies. Sometimes, people don't want to go through the hassle of searching for a person just to queue casually. If that was the case, it would no longer be a casual game mode and _Casual_ is what Anet wants.

>

> It's why AT's is perfect for 2's (or 3v3 c: ) because people can actually plan a few hours ahead of time for a partner.

 

Ooo, if AT's will fire **regulary** and they will be swiss format as planned, that wouldn't be much difference.

[MithranArkanere.8957]

I think a game mode should not be released until there's at least 2 or 3 maps for it.

 

Otherwise there won't be a way to compare what is the 'core' of the game mode and what's the intention for it.

 

Also, if new modes are introduced, at least some should use the Mist Champions, which are rather underused now. For example:

 

**Escort/Payload style game:**

 

* In this mode, players escort a Mist Champion to the enemy base, while the enemy team tries to stop them.

* The champion takes less damage and moves faster for each ally within its range, but stops with no allies near it.

* There would be 4 checkpoints on the path to the enemy base. Whenever a checkpoint is reached a teleporter is unlocked, allowing defeated players reviving at their base to teleport from the base to a safe location near that checkpoint.

* When a champion is killed, another one is summoned at the last checkpoint reached. This can happen 5 times.

* The next champion spawns in 30 seconds, but players can speed this up by using an object near the checkpoint. This object will not be on a completely safe spot (it may have pillars or other cover obstacles around it), but using this object is instant, without a channel.

* If a player uses the object, the champion summoned will be the same they have selected, unless that one has been summoned already. If the object is not used, the champion will be random.

* The same champion can't be summoned twice. If the player using the object has a champion that has been summoned already, a random one is picked even when the object is used.

* Players should decide beforehand which champions they want to summon and in what order they want to summon them.

* At certain points in time during the match there may be bonus events like a spot to channel and gain a bonus, like summon an additional weaker champion, or a barrier for the champion, or a skyhammer attack on the path of the champion.

* It could have either a single round, or two rounds alternating attacking and defense.

* In a single round, both sides have to escort and defend at the same time.

* A champion moves at full speed with 3 allies around it, and it can reach the enemy base in 9 minutes at full speed.

* The round has a 20 minute timer.

* In alternating rounds, one side has to defend and the other escorts, then on the second round they switch roles.

* The champion moves at full speed with 5 allies around it and can reach the enemy base in 4,5 minutes at full speed.

* Each round has a 10 minute timer.

* A round ends early if a team loses all 5 champions or reaches the enemy base.

* The winner after either one or two rounds is determined by the accumulated score.

* Scoring could go as follows:

* 75 points for each checkpoint reached by a mist champion.

* 200 points for reaching the enemy base.

* 75 points for defeating each of the first 4 champions.

* 200 for defeating the last champion.

* Just +1 point for defeating players. This score is so low so teams can't easily win just from player kill, but they are still counted to act as a tie breaker.

 

[Delweyn.1309]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> We still have no current plans to support additional game modes with a queue. The long and short of it is that we feel that splitting the population right now is really risky and could have a major negative impact on the game.

>

> That being said, as mentioned in the Tournaments thread, we do plan to support additional game modes, to some degree, with event tournaments. The frequency of these tournaments will be determined, in part, by how popular these tournaments become. Our first special tournament will likely be a 2v2 tournament. I also foresee the possibility of Stronghold and even Courtyard tournaments.

>

> In addition, we’re currently discussing the feasibility of adding custom arena support/special tournament support for large team (15 v 15?) elimination style matches. This does get a bit more complicated as the current UI breaks with anything more than 10 v 10.

>

> What other game modes would you like to see show up in tournaments? Keep in mind that any game modes requiring new maps would involve quite a long development time.

 

Thank you (a bit late) for these news.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The current 5v5 conquest mode is really nice but it's designed/suited for a competitive gameplay of teams, not 5 pugs.

 

What's missing in the pvp of GW2 is a less competitive and more fun/casual mode, where players will just enter just to fight together without thinking too much about strategy. I mean a team strategy.

It needs a pvp mode that will attract all players, pve players. I think that focusing on small team seize and competitive gameplay would curb the pvp of GW2.

There is a lot of pve players who get disgusted by the current mode because the _small composition of 5 players in small maps_, makes them vulnerable and quickly pushed. And only 1 player afk in a team of 5 is a crippling problem.

 

I'm sorry to take WOW as exemple but their capture the flag in Warsong Gulch and ressource race in Arathi Bassin are 2 pvp modes that have proven to be successfull and never get old.

I think dev could start from these 2 modes and put the gw2's touch in it. _10v10 / 15v15 in bigger maps_, With small secondary objectives to _dispatch people_ (pvp bonuses - points bonuses...).

1 player afk will not be a big problem in bigger teams and, like in WOW, people could disconnect and be replaced by new players.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The experience of deathmatch could have been good but the problem was the size of the map. Too small. So people were blobing together and it was hard to dispatch them.

 

In all cases, the new pvp should be different from what exists already. Always 5v5 conquest in new small maps is not really new.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Good luck and a lot of people have faith in you :)

 

Thank you for thinking about pvp. What's good in pvp is that, once the few modes will be nicely polished, people will be able to play them indefinitively, in comparaison of pve where people needs always new maps/items/story ... A lot of work to renew always.

 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Edit :

- I know my english is not so good and I hope that you will have a good laught :D But I think you will understand what I mean.

- A duel mode will be very very appreciated too, please ^^

- A better end game score will be nice, with all players stats visible in 1 table.

[Crab Fear.1624]

Conquest maps give points for control of nodes, and kills. Sometimes you can get extra points from the bonus "objective", or a buff/bump. The game mode will allow a small variety of builds to shine.

It seems that the developers do not want to move away from this game play. I have seen 2v2 or 3v3 in the works, but I can't say for certain that it will please the larger crowd. For one you can narrow down the blame/fault for the loss much easier with a smaller pack. Secondly if these "awesome" players are as good as they claim, the top dogs will be just a few. How is that bad? If you can never have the hope of being the best, would you not lose interest. Take notice, I said "never have hope". That means no matter what you do, be it training, changing your build, changing partners, you will always be beat. It would seem to me that these game modes will be dominated by the most "elite crowd". I guess you could entertain yourself by being the "best of the scrubs".

 

**In my opinion, if you want to make conquest more interesting, consider adding a payload type secondary objective. It doesn't have to give a lot of points, but I believe it can pull away from the point controlling builds. (the payload should not have to be carried by a player like as in spirit watch)

This type of objective may greatly change rotation and increase class and build variety if you design it well.

Perhaps you could have some supply cow constantly at a set interval, or random interval carrying the +5 or +10 points towards it objective. Maybe make the game a win if they get 20 or so of these successfully. The nodes you control should be the same points, and kills should be the same points.**

 

You get to choose from a node holder, payload protector, support healer for the team, speedster de-capper, or player sniper. There maybe be other roles, but the point is there are more roles than standard conquest.

 

**Generally** you have to be a node holder, or node taker. Maybe you can be a killer, but the first 2 are generally must haves, unless your team is greatly superior in **TRUE SKILL** (because you can not discount smurfs, they mess up match balance)

 

Even if this idea is bad, my point is that conquest needs to have a secondary objective that can pull away from the tank/bunker/aoe point control majority mindset, and allow for multiple roles to excel at different things.

 

If class **A,B,C** are really great at task **X**, and **D,E,F** are really good at task **Y**, you really shouldn't have a game mode that essentially only has task **X**. Bring in task **Y**, and if you are feeing ambitious throw in task **Z**. Perhaps class **G,H,I** can balance between them all, but without multiple options **people will choose the class best suited for the task**

[Guizao.4167]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> We still have no current plans to support additional game modes with a queue. The long and short of it is that we feel that splitting the population right now is really risky and could have a major negative impact on the game.

>

> That being said, as mentioned in the Tournaments thread, we do plan to support additional game modes, to some degree, with event tournaments. The frequency of these tournaments will be determined, in part, by how popular these tournaments become. Our first special tournament will likely be a 2v2 tournament. I also foresee the possibility of Stronghold and even Courtyard tournaments.

>

> In addition, we’re currently discussing the feasibility of adding custom arena support/special tournament support for large team (15 v 15?) elimination style matches. This does get a bit more complicated as the current UI breaks with anything more than 10 v 10.

>

> What other game modes would you like to see show up in tournaments? Keep in mind that any game modes requiring new maps would involve quite a long development time.

 

How about a dedicated GvG map for sPvP tournaments?

[OutOfOrder.3719]

We really need a 1vs1 or 2vs2 ranked PvP team ladder or at least one type of PvP game mode that is Not Conquest or Stronghold.

 

If you compare this game to other real time strategy games like Starcraft 2 or Warcraft 3, no one ever respected team games of 3vs3 or 4vs 4. People loved playing them, but no one ever took them seriously.

 

The skill level of players was always stronger for solo and 2vs 2 team players battling it out.

 

And the problem with WvW is that you rarely have 10vs10 fights. It's always outnumbered battles of 5 vs 10 or even 10 vs 30. This is one of my favorite GW2 game formats, but I have never taken it so seriously.

 

This is why a 8vs8 or 10vs10 format for Guilds vs Guilds is extremely important.

 

Having Guild vs Guild fights could be balanced more effectively than the massive Zerg vs Zerg fights we currently have.

 

Having a new PvP ranked format can only introduce more gamers to the PvP community.

 

By the way, I'm extremely excited for the changes coming to World vs World and the game play that will result from having new worlds and players being matched up with each other 8 weeks.

 

And I know a new game mode would probably take over 1 year to realistically create, but I guarantee GW2 players will play PvP more if 1vs1, 2vs2 or even Guild vs Guild fights were an option.

[Eddbopkins.2630]

> @"Ben Phongluangtham.1065" said:

> We still have no current plans to support additional game modes with a queue. The long and short of it is that we feel that splitting the population right now is really risky and could have a major negative impact on the game.

>

> That being said, as mentioned in the Tournaments thread, we do plan to support additional game modes, to some degree, with event tournaments. The frequency of these tournaments will be determined, in part, by how popular these tournaments become. Our first special tournament will likely be a 2v2 tournament. I also foresee the possibility of Stronghold and even Courtyard tournaments.

>

> In addition, we’re currently discussing the feasibility of adding custom arena support/special tournament support for large team (15 v 15?) elimination style matches. This does get a bit more complicated as the current UI breaks with anything more than 10 v 10.

>

> What other game modes would you like to see show up in tournaments? Keep in mind that any game modes requiring new maps would involve quite a long development time.

 

Other game modes? Idk how about what guild wars 1 bread and butter pvp was like. Can we sprinkle alittle bit of that onto gw2? Because nothing but conquest is ef-en killing me.

[psyt.9415]

I just really don’t like to stand on tiny circles can we just have an instanced copy paste of WVW on an 8 v 8 scale. Capture a farm, a blacksmith, and a lumber mill not a tiny little circle that’s completely overlapped in condi

[Stand The Wall.6987]

Hello Ben!

 

The gang's interest in new event game modes has me very excited. I would like to propose two easy (in the sense that you don't need to make new maps/a ton of new mechanics) new modes that would be a great addition to GW2 PvP. Basically its a copy of Overwatch's Assault and Escort, renamed to Brawl and Protector respectively. Perhaps change the spawn points/some kinda mechanics for the attackers to give them an advantage so it doesn't end up being a stalemate 75% of the time. Would something like that be feasible? I think it would be awesome, since it puts emphasis on team fights which a lot of people crave. As for a stronghold rework, I think it would be a great hybrid style map (both Brawl and Protector in one awesome package), with one team on offense and the other team on defense. First to 3 wins, teams switch roles each round, make the heroes faster, get rid of the supply mechanic and have two/ish bombers (they need more hp I think) spawn every 10 or so seconds, change the treb so it can hit the enemies door (can only repair with supply gained from kills), aaand yeah. Stronghold could be a really fun Fort Aspenwood style map with the right changes. Anyway I think the biggest thing holding Stronghold back is the fact that it spreads everyone out across the map.

For a Courtyard rework, the 10v10 format is awesome. I think it would be a good idea to have a few timed rounds. Switch the teams around every round so its completely random! Allow trios! This would add to the chaos and make it very fun I think. I'm getting very excited just thinking of the possibilities lol. Oh and a build template saver would be ideal to have for this.

 

Cheers! ~

 

 

[pah.4931]

More game modes in the random queue will go very FAR in adding an experience that feels more akin to balance. If not every map was "Stand in this circle and try not to die" then we'd see a lot more interesting builds being played, instead of everyone "chasing the meta" of conquest-only.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

Hi gang,

 

I would like to add that you wouldn't have to add separate queues. you could add a game mode selection option similar to the map select one. that combined with revamps of old maps, you could be lookin at a lower cost improvement that imo would go very far indeed. as for anything beyond 10v10, I think an improvement to the guild hall arena would be your best bet. definitely support 10v10 style maps though.

[JETWING.2759]

Stronghold changes?

 

**Objective:**

* Conquest enemy base via capture point (no longer Lord).

 

**NPCs:**

* Without NPCs.

 

**Lanes:**

* 3. Both for atk/def.

 

**Itens:**

* Each player has 2 or more slots to itens.

* These itens can be bombs, rocket lauchers, traps, radars, etc...

 

**Zones:**

* Same as currently.

* Currently internal base for respawn and capture circle.

* Currently external base for bank and shop.

* Shop sels itens and special weapons for help on match.

* Bank stores the money.

* Teams get money by dealing damage or destroing the enemy bank or shop.

* Bank and shop reappear after some time if destroyed.

* Walls can be destroyed by special weapons that teams buy on shop.

 

Just some ideas.