Competitive Cooperation [Suggestion]

[Ithilwen.1529]

My interest in Mesmer has led me to read some of the work of Franz Anton Mesmer. More recently, it's lead to a casual study of psychology...To make a very long story short:

 

TLDR:

 

Competition and factionalization inherently create "toxicity." Cooperation normally has the opposite effect.

 

One "trick," then, to building a community is to create cooperation for mutual benefit. How can this be achieved in PvP?

 

 

**SUGGESTION** A sliding scale prize. This would be set up similar to the current PvP pip system. Instead of clocking individual games, it would clock total games played by the community.

 

At the end of the season, everyone who had contributed,( with some relatively low threshold, ) to total games played would receive part of the season reward.

 

 

In this way, each player would be contributing to the community's success. **Encouraging players benefits everyone in this scenario. Discouraging players hurts everyone.** Under this system everyone has a tangible motive for working together or at least not to work against others playing.

 

 

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> My interest in Mesmer has led me to read some of the work of Franz Anton Mesmer. More recently, it's lead to a casual study of psychology...To make a very long story short:

>

> TLDR:

>

> Competition and factionalization inherently create "toxicity." Cooperation normally has the opposite effect.

>

> One "trick," then, to building a community is to create cooperation for mutual benefit. How can this be achieved in PvP?

>

>

> **SUGGESTION** A sliding scale prize. This would be set up similar to the current PvP pip system. Instead of clocking individual games, it would clock total games played by the community.

>

> At the end of the season, everyone who had contributed,( with some relatively low threshold, ) to total games played would receive part of the season reward.

>

>

> In this way, each player would be contributing to the community's success. **Encouraging players benefits everyone in this scenario. Discouraging players hurts everyone.** Under this system everyone has a tangible motive for working together or at least not to work against others playing.

>

>

 

How about just introduce ranked team que? That's literally the best way to introduce higher cooperation right now.

[Ithilwen.1529]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > My interest in Mesmer has led me to read some of the work of Franz Anton Mesmer. More recently, it's lead to a casual study of psychology...To make a very long story short:

> >

> > TLDR:

> >

> > Competition and factionalization inherently create "toxicity." Cooperation normally has the opposite effect.

> >

> > One "trick," then, to building a community is to create cooperation for mutual benefit. How can this be achieved in PvP?

> >

> >

> > **SUGGESTION** A sliding scale prize. This would be set up similar to the current PvP pip system. Instead of clocking individual games, it would clock total games played by the community.

> >

> > At the end of the season, everyone who had contributed,( with some relatively low threshold, ) to total games played would receive part of the season reward.

> >

> >

> > In this way, each player would be contributing to the community's success. **Encouraging players benefits everyone in this scenario. Discouraging players hurts everyone.** Under this system everyone has a tangible motive for working together or at least not to work against others playing.

> >

> >

>

> How about just introduce ranked team que? That's literally the best way to introduce higher cooperation right now.

 

That misses the point. **The current AT does just as you suggest and it clearly has not improved community feeling, in my opinion.**

 

My suggestion makes every player in PvP effectively part of one "team."

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > > My interest in Mesmer has led me to read some of the work of Franz Anton Mesmer. More recently, it's lead to a casual study of psychology...To make a very long story short:

> > >

> > > TLDR:

> > >

> > > Competition and factionalization inherently create "toxicity." Cooperation normally has the opposite effect.

> > >

> > > One "trick," then, to building a community is to create cooperation for mutual benefit. How can this be achieved in PvP?

> > >

> > >

> > > **SUGGESTION** A sliding scale prize. This would be set up similar to the current PvP pip system. Instead of clocking individual games, it would clock total games played by the community.

> > >

> > > At the end of the season, everyone who had contributed,( with some relatively low threshold, ) to total games played would receive part of the season reward.

> > >

> > >

> > > In this way, each player would be contributing to the community's success. **Encouraging players benefits everyone in this scenario. Discouraging players hurts everyone.** Under this system everyone has a tangible motive for working together or at least not to work against others playing.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > How about just introduce ranked team que? That's literally the best way to introduce higher cooperation right now.

>

> That misses the point. **The current AT does just as you suggest and it clearly has not improved community feeling, in my opinion.**

>

> My suggestion makes every player in PvP effectively part of one "team."

 

Is 3 extremely noncompetitive games every 6 hours a good way to improve cooperation? Because that's basically the current iteration of ATs.

 

I'm really glad you see that ATs aren't working because people advocating for solo que only are telling people who want to play in teams to go to unranked or do ATs.

 

Both are extremely unbalanced matches as people go to unranked to learn the game and ATs have no rating requirement.

 

The only way to improve the sense of community is to introduce team ques back into ranked.

[Ithilwen.1529]

I advocate for solo only.

 

The ATs are not working. They are an example of a team required queue. So the suggestion of making team queue in ranked is not born out by the current conditions in game. **If ATs, which are team queue only, don't work... then why should teams in ranked work?** It is not logical to argue that a failure should lead us to conclude that we need to do the same thing on a larger scale.

 

Again, your post misses the point. Teams and factions tend to break down community. I'm proposing making all PvP players part of a single "team" as a means of creating cooperation.

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> I advocate for solo only.

>

> The ATs are not working. They are an example of a team required queue. So the suggestion of making team queue in ranked is not born out by the current conditions in game. **If ATs, which are team queue only, don't work... then why should teams in ranked work?** It is not logical to argue that a failure should lead us to conclude that we need to do the same thing on a larger scale.

>

> Again, your post misses the point. Teams and factions tend to break down community. I'm proposing making all PvP players part of a single "team" as a means of creating cooperation.

 

Why should teams in ranked work? Because ATs are not filtered by division. You'll have legendaries going up against bronze even up until the finals which is why you see the same teams 500-0 until the end.

 

On the other hand, if team que was in ranked, you'd have legendary players going up against other legendaries.

 

You're extremely incorrect. Teams and factions tend to break down community? No. That's so wrong. Teams and factions encourage communities as well as competition. Basically EVERY single competitive PvP game has teams and factions. The suggestion to make everyone belong on the same team is so completely outlandish I don't even know how you can conceive it.

 

You basically suggested to implement one of the biggest memes ever. _"Everyone wins. Have a participation medal! You really earned it."_ :D

[FyzE.3472]

This is actually a nice idea! The more you contribute - the more you will get. Makes you want to actually try and win your games too! But then the rewards should be worth it, I guess :)

[GrubySzymek.1362]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> Cooperation normally has the opposite effect.

 

Try raiding.

[Abelisk.4527]

What about having ***two*** factions: Red and Blue? Let's say Anet has players choose a side for **an entire season**. The side with more wins gets a larger reward at the end of the season, the losing side gets a smaller reward. You can't switch sides during the season once started.

 

Competition is toxic but it makes you feel proud and accomplished if you succeed.

 

[Ithilwen.1529]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > I advocate for solo only.

> >

> You basically suggested to implement one of the biggest memes ever. _"Everyone wins. Have a participation medal! You really earned it."_ :D

 

 

 

That wasn't precisely what I suggested. Instead I'm saying give the entire community a common goal and a common reward.

 

This might cause players to encourage one another to play, since it would be in each players' self interest to do so.

 

Such cooperation tends to reduce toxicity and create feelings of unity.

 

 

[dmndbcK.3425]

Reduce Toxicity and Create Feelings of Unity. So instead of creating feelings of unity by allowing ranked team queue (Where you would only get put against other 5 mans or 3 man / 2 man split; never solo) you would rather diverge the community by watering down the very core of the word "PvP". Giving everyone prizes in PvP, is what has caused this games PvP to die even further after team queue and ESL was killed off.

 

Yes, now we have more people participating in PvP. But is it worth having a bunch of idiots throwing games, playing trashcan builds, and afking because of prizes being given out to everyone since now your suggestion implies that random 1500 AP guy can just play PvP without a care to win/lose, and on top of getting reward track rewards he will now get a reward just for playing (similarly to WvW).

 

Sounds like someone has never played an actual competitive title. When doing a ranked system in any other game, you do not get rewarded for just playing. You get rewarded for winning, and penalized for losing. Games aren't about sharing is caring, it's about competition which is healthy in both life and in game.

[Abelisk.4527]

> @"dmndbcK.3425" said:

> Reduce Toxicity and Create Feelings of Unity. So instead of creating feelings of unity by allowing ranked team queue (Where you would only get put against other 5 mans or 3 man / 2 man split; never solo) you would rather diverge the community by watering down the very core of the word "PvP". Giving everyone prizes in PvP, is what has caused this games PvP to die even further after team queue and ESL was killed off.

>

> Yes, now we have more people participating in PvP. But is it worth having a bunch of idiots throwing games, playing trashcan builds, and afking because of prizes being given out to everyone since now your suggestion implies that random 1500 AP guy can just play PvP without a care to win/lose, and on top of getting reward track rewards he will now get a reward just for playing (similarly to WvW).

>

> Sounds like someone has never played an actual competitive title. When doing a ranked system in any other game, you do not get rewarded for just playing. You get rewarded for winning, and penalized for losing. Games aren't about sharing is caring, it's about competition which is healthy in both life and in game.

 

It's uncertain whether prizes are the downfall of PvP. It can be argued HoT and the superior "elite specializations" are what butchered build diversity and the population (see Chronobunker Season 1)

[dmndbcK.3425]

Of course balance and everything as well. But prizing definitely brought some downfall aswell after HOT/Elite specs. ArenaNet just basically keeps placing bandaids on everything instead of actually properly fixing the game.

[Ithilwen.1529]

> @"dmndbcK.3425" said:

> Reduce Toxicity and Create Feelings of Unity. So instead of creating feelings of unity by allowing ranked team queue (Where you would only get put against other 5 mans or 3 man / 2 man split; never solo) you would rather diverge the community by watering down the very core of the word "PvP". Giving everyone prizes in PvP, is what has caused this games PvP to die even further after team queue and ESL was killed off.

>

> Yes, now we have more people participating in PvP. But is it worth having a bunch of idiots throwing games, playing trashcan builds, and afking because of prizes being given out to everyone since now your suggestion implies that random 1500 AP guy can just play PvP without a care to win/lose, and on top of getting reward track rewards he will now get a reward just for playing (similarly to WvW).

>

> Sounds like someone has never played an actual competitive title. When doing a ranked system in any other game, you do not get rewarded for just playing. You get rewarded for winning, and penalized for losing. Games aren't about sharing is caring, it's about competition which is healthy in both life and in game.

 

I think you're operating under a couple of misconceptions.

 

First, team vs team creates unity within the team.. however it divides the larger community into tiny factions. This increases toxicity on the whole.

 

The second is more difficult to address in a succinct way. What you are espousing here is very similar to the objectivist views promoted by Ayn Rand and others. These views are quite popular among certain segments of society. I would assert that History has shown them to be ineffective. Suffice it to say that a vast majority of social scientists would likely agree that altruism is ultimately more effective than selfishness. Ultimately what serves the community serves the individual.

 

**My proposal more or less makes it so that EVERYONE is on one team. This team "competes" to create as many games played as possible.** Doing this makes it so that it is in everyone's self interest to be nice to fellow players. *It also allows the community as a whole to accomplish something, which promotes unity.*

 

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > @"dmndbcK.3425" said:

> > Reduce Toxicity and Create Feelings of Unity. So instead of creating feelings of unity by allowing ranked team queue (Where you would only get put against other 5 mans or 3 man / 2 man split; never solo) you would rather diverge the community by watering down the very core of the word "PvP". Giving everyone prizes in PvP, is what has caused this games PvP to die even further after team queue and ESL was killed off.

> >

> > Yes, now we have more people participating in PvP. But is it worth having a bunch of idiots throwing games, playing trashcan builds, and afking because of prizes being given out to everyone since now your suggestion implies that random 1500 AP guy can just play PvP without a care to win/lose, and on top of getting reward track rewards he will now get a reward just for playing (similarly to WvW).

> >

> > Sounds like someone has never played an actual competitive title. When doing a ranked system in any other game, you do not get rewarded for just playing. You get rewarded for winning, and penalized for losing. Games aren't about sharing is caring, it's about competition which is healthy in both life and in game.

>

> I think you're operating under a couple of misconceptions.

>

> First, team vs team creates unity within the team.. however it divides the larger community into tiny factions. This increases toxicity on the whole.

>

> The second is more difficult to address in a succinct way. What you are espousing here is very similar to the objectivist views promoted by Ayn Rand and others. These views are quite popular among certain segments of society. I would assert that History has shown them to be ineffective. Suffice it to say that a vast majority of social scientists would likely agree that altruism is ultimately more effective than selfishness. Ultimately what serves the community serves the individual.

>

> **My proposal more or less makes it so that EVERYONE is on one team. This team "competes" to create as many games played as possible.** Doing this makes it so that it is in everyone's self interest to be nice to fellow players. *It also allows the community as a whole to accomplish something, which promotes unity.*

>

 

I think you're also operating under a couple of misconceptions.

 

1. What you're proposing also encourages people to spam as many games as possible with little care if they win or lose.

2. Rather than having factions compete against each other, putting everyone on the same team reduces competition.

3. You're throwing out a bunch of random names and buzzwords to make yourself sound smarter but in reality, this entire thread is another way to say, "Everyone wins!"

4. It's just a bad idea. Do you honestly think people will feel more "unified" if they have another reward tracker on their screen? Everyone will just play as they usually do and will end up receiving an extra reward at the end of the season. Nothing changes.

5. Introducing team ques back into ranked is the perfect way to build a healthier community and increase competition. This whole "unity" aspect is also increased as people now have an incentive to find and make friends to play with. Giving everyone a participation medal at the end of the season for the amount of total games played won't amount to anything except a little extra gold in everyone's pockets.

6. You're mistaken in your belief that people actually care about "Unity." This whole carebear idea with the notion that everyone will be happy and holding hands in the end is ridiculous. Not to mention that this won't be achieved by adding another reward tracker among the countless others we already have.

[Ithilwen.1529]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > > @"dmndbcK.3425" said:

> > > Reduce Toxicity and Create Feelings of Unity. So instead of creating feelings of unity by allowing ranked team queue (Where you would only get put against other 5 mans or 3 man / 2 man split; never solo) you would rather diverge the community by watering down the very core of the word "PvP". Giving everyone prizes in PvP, is what has caused this games PvP to die even further after team queue and ESL was killed off.

> > >

> > > Yes, now we have more people participating in PvP. But is it worth having a bunch of idiots throwing games, playing trashcan builds, and afking because of prizes being given out to everyone since now your suggestion implies that random 1500 AP guy can just play PvP without a care to win/lose, and on top of getting reward track rewards he will now get a reward just for playing (similarly to WvW).

> > >

> > > Sounds like someone has never played an actual competitive title. When doing a ranked system in any other game, you do not get rewarded for just playing. You get rewarded for winning, and penalized for losing. Games aren't about sharing is caring, it's about competition which is healthy in both life and in game.

> >

> > I think you're operating under a couple of misconceptions.

> >

> > First, team vs team creates unity within the team.. however it divides the larger community into tiny factions. This increases toxicity on the whole.

> >

> > The second is more difficult to address in a succinct way. What you are espousing here is very similar to the objectivist views promoted by Ayn Rand and others. These views are quite popular among certain segments of society. I would assert that History has shown them to be ineffective. Suffice it to say that a vast majority of social scientists would likely agree that altruism is ultimately more effective than selfishness. Ultimately what serves the community serves the individual.

> >

> > **My proposal more or less makes it so that EVERYONE is on one team. This team "competes" to create as many games played as possible.** Doing this makes it so that it is in everyone's self interest to be nice to fellow players. *It also allows the community as a whole to accomplish something, which promotes unity.*

> >

>

> I think you're also operating under a couple of misconceptions.

>

> 1. What you're proposing also encourages people to spam as many games as possible with little care if they win or lose.

 

Having more games played would be healthy for queue times and player experience. As to "little care," I doubt that, few can play a game without making an effort to win.

 

> 2. Rather than having factions compete against each other, putting everyone on the same team reduces competition.

 

I'd argue that right now, excessive competition is one of the issues. It causes toxicity and discourages newcomers badly.

 

> 3. You're throwing out a bunch of random names and buzzwords to make yourself sound smarter but in reality, this entire thread is another way to say, "Everyone wins!"

 

Personal insults aside, no I am not. I'm saying everyone works together to benefit all. I can define every term I've used and give you background on each concept.

 

> 4. It's just a bad idea. Do you honestly think people will feel more "unified" if they have another reward tracker on their screen? Everyone will just play as they usually do and will end up receiving an extra reward at the end of the season. Nothing changes.

 

Perhaps, but if the number of games to get the reward is high enough it might also generate esprit de corp. Everyone would need to participate to make the goal.

 

> 5. Introducing team ques back into ranked is the perfect way to build a healthier community and increase competition. This whole "unity" aspect is also increased as people now have an incentive to find and make friends to play with. Giving everyone a participation medal at the end of the season for the amount of total games played won't amount to anything except a little extra gold in everyone's pockets.

 

Two things here; teams have historically resulted in curbstomping solos and new players and/or long queues. Neither is health for the game and both decrease the feeling of community. **History is against your argument.** Second Unity and competition are almost mutually exclusive ULESS EVERYONE GETS SOMETHING OUT OF IT.

 

> 6. You're mistaken in your belief that people actually care about "Unity." This whole carebear idea with the notion that everyone will be happy and holding hands in the end is ridiculous. Not to mention that this won't be achieved by adding another reward tracker among the countless others we already have.

 

Again ignoring the personal insult. The PvP player pool is excessively low. The primary cause of this has been excessive "competition" which has discouraged newcomers. A strong secondary factor is the toxicity created by cutthroat competition and exploitation.

 

**If we wish to attract and hold players, we need an improved community and we need to protect newcomers from excessive competition.**

 

 

[Chaith.8256]

@"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP.

 

@"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot...

[Math.5123]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

>

> Again ignoring the personal insult. The PvP player pool is excessively low. The primary cause of this has been excessive "competition" which has discouraged newcomers. A strong secondary factor is the toxicity created by cutthroat competition and exploitation.

>

> **If we wish to attract and hold players, we need an improved community and we need to protect newcomers from excessive competition.**

>

>

 

I'm about 300% sure that balance killed PvP, not teams. Chronomancer killed ESL, which in turn decreased money generated by ArenaNet. This left the budget lower than it was before and with fewer and fewer tournaments, every pro eventually left.

But if you think they all left because of team queue, you are free to think so I guess. Just stop spreading fake news.

[shadowpass.4236]

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP.

>

> @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot...

 

That's not me btw lol

 

I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too.

[zoopop.5630]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > > @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > > My interest in Mesmer has led me to read some of the work of Franz Anton Mesmer. More recently, it's lead to a casual study of psychology...To make a very long story short:

> > >

> > > TLDR:

> > >

> > > Competition and factionalization inherently create "toxicity." Cooperation normally has the opposite effect.

> > >

> > > One "trick," then, to building a community is to create cooperation for mutual benefit. How can this be achieved in PvP?

> > >

> > >

> > > **SUGGESTION** A sliding scale prize. This would be set up similar to the current PvP pip system. Instead of clocking individual games, it would clock total games played by the community.

> > >

> > > At the end of the season, everyone who had contributed,( with some relatively low threshold, ) to total games played would receive part of the season reward.

> > >

> > >

> > > In this way, each player would be contributing to the community's success. **Encouraging players benefits everyone in this scenario. Discouraging players hurts everyone.** Under this system everyone has a tangible motive for working together or at least not to work against others playing.

> > >

> > >

> >

> > How about just introduce ranked team que? That's literally the best way to introduce higher cooperation right now.

>

> That misses the point. **The current AT does just as you suggest and it clearly has not improved community feeling, in my opinion.**

>

> My suggestion makes every player in PvP effectively part of one "team."

 

you suck.

[Crab Fear.1624]

DOWN WITH THE KURZICKS!

 

NO ONE FAMILY. KILL ENEMY, SAVE ALLY!

[Sampson.2403]

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> I advocate for solo only.

>

> The ATs are not working. They are an example of a team required queue. So the suggestion of making team queue in ranked is not born out by the current conditions in game. **If ATs, which are team queue only, don't work... then why should teams in ranked work?** It is not logical to argue that a failure should lead us to conclude that we need to do the same thing on a larger scale.

>

> Again, your post misses the point. Teams and factions tend to break down community. I'm proposing making all PvP players part of a single "team" as a means of creating cooperation.

 

I don't want to derail your post because i think its a good post and its relieving to see someone make a post on the pvp forums that isn't full of crying about the game but i must call you out here : P

 

Teams and factions break down community? I think you need to lay off the philosphy and re introduce common sense back into your perspective. One of the core principals of any MMO is to encourage the members of the community to meet one another, form groups/guilds and explore the content, PvP or PvE, together.

 

Hell, the name of this game IS "Guild" Wars lulz.

[Ithilwen.1529]

> @"Sampson.2403" said:

> > @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> > I advocate for solo only.

> >

> > The ATs are not working. They are an example of a team required queue. So the suggestion of making team queue in ranked is not born out by the current conditions in game. **If ATs, which are team queue only, don't work... then why should teams in ranked work?** It is not logical to argue that a failure should lead us to conclude that we need to do the same thing on a larger scale.

> >

> > Again, your post misses the point. Teams and factions tend to break down community. I'm proposing making all PvP players part of a single "team" as a means of creating cooperation.

>

> I don't want to derail your post because i think its a good post and its relieving to see someone make a post on the pvp forums that isn't full of crying about the game but i must call you out here : P

>

> Teams and factions break down community? I think you need to lay off the philosphy and re introduce common sense back into your perspective. One of the core principals of any MMO is to encourage the members of the community to meet one another, form groups/guilds and explore the content, PvP or PvE, together.

>

 

Teams and factions create rancor by their very existence. It's an "us and them" situation. **Let me be clear, I'm not specifically opposing teams.** I'm proposing a means of making the entire PvP population a "team." The hope is that this would improve the community. It doesn't preclude other teams.

 

Factions and teams nearly always cause some amount of hostility to other teams. This is especially true in competition.

 

> Hell, the name of this game IS "Guild" Wars lulz.

 

Guild Wars I began after the conclusion of the Guild Wars. That was more than 2 centuries ago.

 

 

[Ithilwen.1529]

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"Ithilwen.1529" , adding a participation prize would fatten up the demographic who PvP for the handouts, not PvP.

> >

> > @"Shadowfall.7148" , Two good players on a team will already dominate, imagine being allowed for queuing as 5, it will just be a few teams facerolling some high level solo/duo/trio queuers. It's objectively a worse idea than a community wide welfare reward pot...

>

> That's not me btw lol

>

> I just hate playing solo. If they introduce duos again, great. Solo que only is a terrible system. If they could figure out a way to make a separate team que system work, that would be cool too.

 

This is an interesting admission. Thank you for the honesty.

[Ithilwen.1529]

> @"AngelLovesFredrik.6741" said:

> > @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> >

> > Again ignoring the personal insult. The PvP player pool is excessively low. The primary cause of this has been excessive "competition" which has discouraged newcomers. A strong secondary factor is the toxicity created by cutthroat competition and exploitation.

> >

> > **If we wish to attract and hold players, we need an improved community and we need to protect newcomers from excessive competition.**

> >

> >

>

> I'm about 300% sure that balance killed PvP, not teams. Chronomancer killed ESL, which in turn decreased money generated by ArenaNet. This left the budget lower than it was before and with fewer and fewer tournaments, every pro eventually left.

> But if you think they all left because of team queue, you are free to think so I guess. Just stop spreading fake news.

 

No I agree that balance in classes and matchmaking has been the largest factor in losing PvP players. Once again, I am not directly opposing teams ( though I do think they are a bad idea. That's a topic for a different thread. )

 

Teams are, by their nature, divisive. They create an "us and them" mind set that is almost always hostile.

 

**I'm proposing that the entire PvP population be placed on 1 "team."** I'm looking for a goal, such as games played during a season, that would allow all to work together for common gain.

 

**There's a system like this in GW1. The world gains the "Favor of the Gods" when players complete accomplishments. All benefit.**