do you want more viable game modes?

[Stand The Wall.6987]

conquest is ok but extremely dull after a while. some simple fixes to stronghold and team deathmatch would revitalize pvp. have people vote on mode just like map so queues aren't split.

[Mikali.9651]

I don't play PvP because I just dislike the conquest mode. I want to fight. I want to annihilate the enemy team until all members are dead to win the encounter and proceed to the next match. I do not care if the fight lasts only for 20 seconds.

Have multiple variations of it. Similar to or copy-paste from the Guild Wars https://wiki.guildwars.com/wiki/Random_Arenas

Normal annihilation, annihilation with obelisk flag stand, annihilation with a priest, kill count - all these were cool and were on rotation mode, changing after each win. You kept playing with the same team members. If it went well, it could mean a friendship, or even a new guild member, a potential PvP partner for next matches.

Have both random and premade modes.

Continue with other modes. Make casual PvP mode like Alliance Battles were. They can be race battles for all I care. Charr vs. Humans. Asura vs. Norn, etc. This is the only conquest mode I've ever enjoyed. You could argue that our PvP mode is basically the AB mode, but they are very different.You had 3 premade parties on each side, each having 4 members, so total 12 vs. 12. The maps were larger (at least for GW). Capture points had NPCs protecting them and you needed to kill them to be able to capture the point. There was no skill ranking, but there was a grind for your own faction, there was a sense of belonging, there was the feeling of being proud, also banters were real PvP themselves.

Don't even let me start on GvG. Just implement it. Let our guild name/tag mean something to us. Let our guild halls mean home to us. Let us create our own strategies which are using the guild hall layout as our strength.

Literally, anything of these could bring me back to play PvP. I want to play PvP cuz I am such type of a person, but I just don't enjoy current mode at all. I have problems with it since the first day and I'll rather play other PvP games than ever touch this kind of PvP mode we currently have.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

Most certainly.

But rather than sit around waiting on the pipe dreams of completely newly designed game modes like a Battle Royale that Arenanet is never going to do, I think it's important that the player base begins requesting something that is realistic to see happen. Requesting a fix & update & reimplementation of Death Match & Stronghold & of course 2v2s, is something that could actually happen.

These game modes would require a real overhaul, but they aren't lost causes. I actually just wrote about this in a different thread and it's a good explanation of what I mean, so I'm going to quote myself here:

@"Trevor Boyer.6524" said:Stronghold is actually pretty fun now that DPS is much higher. Blowing up NPCs is waaaay easier to do now than it was before.

Seems like what was boring to people in the past, was having to spend time to DPS down a group of rats while a tempest tried to heal it or something. Those days are long gone in Stronghold, as anyone would know who has played it recently. Current meta specs just absolutely tear through the Stronghold NPCs like paper. This results in the game mode being a lot more about players vs. players, with much less time spent worrying about NPCs.

But on the other hand, rats are so easy to kill now, that I've encountered games where quite seriously not a single rat ever reaches either of the first gates. And this results in a completely kill oriented death match between two teams, where there is sort of a consistent hanging objective of: "Don't let rats touch the gates while we fight for kill points." I find this fun actually... it ends up being a better death match than the intended Courtyard actual death match, because there ARE still objectives with the death match, other than just respawning & killing. But ultimately, I'm sure Arenanet wouldn't like that dynamic as it really wasn't intended to be played that way.

Guarantee you that when two plat level teams go against each other in Stronghold with such DPS nowadays, that is what happens 9/10 games ^ This posses problems for Stronghold's dynamic, if players seriously wanted it to be reviewed and maybe put into ranked or unranked rotation. Things would need to be done to fix this effect. Maybe things like this:

• Gates need less health
• Rats need more health
• Rat bombs need to deal more damage
• Remove archers and replace with a way to use supply to summon player wielded siege "Like a Charzooka or something" so it is easier for higher tier players in more strategical games to actually get inside of those gates.

And on a different note:

For players who haven't tried Stronghold lately, I suggest doing it and see if you notice the same thing about the dynamic that I did. For those who think that dynamic is fun, what I had mentioned in the above, it had made me consider the idea of reimplementing death match but with objectives in the death match.

Imagine an open arena like the 2v2s, but it was a 5v5, and objectives would spawn around the map that would effect the 5v5 death match. Things like the Sword & Shield artifacts, or the old meditation shrines that granted +5 points on a kill, ect ect.. Honestly, there is a lot that could be done to make Death Match 5v5 player or new 2v2 Arenas really really really spicy and new. Just devise new types of interesting objectives that players must split and contest. It would bring stronger elements into Death Match styled games. This would be REALLY EASY to do on Arenanet's part, and probably the quick fix that this game mode needs for some kind of a new mode that is able to match Conquest in "strategy required" because let me tell ya boys, the reason why these other game modes failed isn't because they were so bad, truth be told, it was because Conquest is so well designed. Conquest remained the preferred mode because your brain has more to think about than simply "winning combat". Conquest is so well designed because rotations and raw experience working objectives and knowing the maps, is every bit as important as mechanical combat skill. If we ever wanted a new game mode to succeed or to bring back old modes, they need to be updated so that they match Conquest in this aspect.

Think about it, you know it's true.

[megilandil.7506]

Problem is if they can create a only team q (that is a major need) due to population issues, ¿population can sustain diferent gamemodes q with their split solo and team? because adding a new mode and merging in standard mixed q only leads to organized teams prepared for the less popular mode forcing with their 5 votes to spawn the mode map farming people who are queuing solo for the most popular format, that was the major issue with stronhold and that was the major issue with courtyard

[Mandatory.6590]

Play other games for pvp.

[Mbelch.9028]

@Mandatory.6590 said:Play other games for pvp.

This game will die a slow death without PvP. Enjoy it, cause that's where it's headed.

[Eddbopkins.2630]

There should be an escort PvP kind of game where it's like a foot ball field and the npc is the actually controllpoint. It moves from one end of the map to the other. And can be taken from each team if a team mate stands long enough in it's radius. It can be 3v3. Everytime the npc is taken it will switch directions and walk towards the friendly teams end giving it a big point gain when reached. Every time someone takes the npc it gives the team some points.

It's like a tug of war kind of game but with a single objective npc to control the game with an added element. Instead of straight up 3v3 tdm.

[SeikeNz.3526]

yes this game need others modes

arenas:1- team mode where there is no such thing as conquest, just enter and kill everyone the last one alive win points for his team2- solo mode where there is no such thing as conquest and team, just enter and kill everyone the last one alive win points for himself with a time limit

fractal arena modes:1- everyone turn into a deadeye with a rifle and daggers plus invisibility, the map is full of trees or buildings where they can jump to hide, they should asssassin each other2- everyone turn into a gladiator with the weapon of his choice, they can pick at the countdown at start, they will fight at a small arena that they can fall, shields should give blocks and bash to knockback people3- mounted battles, players will turn into a Mordrem Guard Cavalier, give players a mount that can fight and have skills with high damage with annoying knockdown effects, if the player mount dies they can fight at normal mode but they will be vulnerable and die easier to mounted players

[UNOwen.7132]

Meh, they wont be viable, and will degenerate into the same couple picks. The thing with conquest is that its design allows for classes that arent good at actually fighting to still be good (like thief), while making mobility relevant and bunker + scourge not overwhelming. If you want deathmatch, just be prepared to see absolutely nothing other than Firebrand, Scourge, possibly Revenant and Spellbreaker. If you want to play Ranger, Thief, Mesmer or Ele? Well youre fucked. And you cant just balance it out, because if everyone does the same job, there will be a best class. Plus the gameplay becomes incredibly dull as a result of the lack of variety and objectives.

[Fueki.4753]

Obviously not.The PvP player base already is a joke size.What we need is not more modes that just shrink the player by dividing it across more modes.We need proper balance, better matchmaking and downsides to duo-queueing.

[BadMed.3846]

One balanced game mode is more than enough. Experiments bring more modes like stronghold that are not needed.

[DoomNexus.5324]

While I'm not a big fan of TDM for GW2 I'd love to see some changes to Stronghold since I think the game mode in theory is pretty nice. Not that I'd like to play it ranked but yea, I even very occasionally still play it nowadays.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@UNOwen.7132 said:that arent good at actually fighting to still be good (like thief)If you want deathmatch, just be prepared to see absolutely nothing other than Firebrand, Scourge, possibly Revenant and Spellbreaker.

lol what? teef destroys in small scale.a lot of high damage specs can demolish the fb + scourge combo if you're careful. plus that combo would get kilt fast since they can't stack up on toughness.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@Fueki.4753 said:Obviously not.The PvP player base already is a joke size.What we need is not more modes that just shrink the player by dividing it across more modes.We need proper balance, better matchmaking and downsides to duo-queueing.

so you didn't read the op but only the thread title... lol.

[UNOwen.7132]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:that arent good at actually fighting to still be good (like thief)If you want deathmatch, just be prepared to see absolutely

nothing

other than Firebrand, Scourge, possibly Revenant and Spellbreaker.

lol what? teef destroys in small scale.a lot of high damage specs can demolish the fb + scourge combo if you're careful. plus that combo would get kilt fast since they can't stack up on toughness.

Thief doesnt even destroy in 1v1, and it gets exponentially worse the bigger the numbers on both sides get. And yeah, we saw that with the 2v2 ATs, where FB + Scourge were the most picked comp by far, and the ones that did the best, as well as the ones that won every time. Clearly people totally can deal with them, they just all failed to do so. No, in reality its just not a comp you can beat.

[Fueki.4753]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Fueki.4753 said:Obviously not.The PvP player base already is a joke size.What we need is not more modes that just shrink the player by dividing it across more modes.We need proper balance, better matchmaking and downsides to duo-queueing.

so you didn't read the op but only the thread title... lol.

It's not some simple fixes that PvP needs, it's massive changes to the balance, which Arenanet has proven again and again not to do.After years of neglect, I doubt it'll ever revitalize.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:that arent good at actually fighting to still be good (like thief)If you want deathmatch, just be prepared to see absolutely

nothing

other than Firebrand, Scourge, possibly Revenant and Spellbreaker.

lol what? teef destroys in small scale.a lot of high damage specs can demolish the fb + scourge combo if you're careful. plus that combo would get kilt fast since they can't stack up on toughness.

Thief doesnt even destroy in 1v1, and it gets exponentially worse the bigger the numbers on both sides get. And yeah, we saw that with the 2v2 ATs, where FB + Scourge were the most picked comp by far, and the ones that did the best, as well as the ones that won every time. Clearly people totally can deal with them, they just all failed to do so. No, in reality its just not a comp you can beat.

ah, well I wasn't referencing 2v2s. no doubt it would be strong there, but its false to assume it would dominate team death match in bigger numbers given how gear works in pvp. obviously it would always be used since they both provide necessities, but its far from unkillable.

teef doesn't even destroy in 1v1. ok pal. this is death match we're talking about, obviously in conquest they lose. heard of staff teef in bigger groups?

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@Fueki.4753 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Fueki.4753 said:Obviously not.The PvP player base already is a joke size.What we need is not more modes that just shrink the player by dividing it across more modes.We need proper balance, better matchmaking and downsides to duo-queueing.

so you didn't read the op but only the thread title... lol.

It's not some simple fixes that PvP needs, it's massive changes to the balance, which Arenanet has proven again and again not to do.After years of neglect, I doubt it'll ever revitalize.

the current balance can handle more modes. it wouldn't be pretty, but it would work.

[UNOwen.7132]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:that arent good at actually fighting to still be good (like thief)If you want deathmatch, just be prepared to see absolutely

nothing

other than Firebrand, Scourge, possibly Revenant and Spellbreaker.

lol what? teef destroys in small scale.a lot of high damage specs can demolish the fb + scourge combo if you're careful. plus that combo would get kilt fast since they can't stack up on toughness.

Thief doesnt even destroy in 1v1, and it gets exponentially worse the bigger the numbers on both sides get. And yeah, we saw that with the 2v2 ATs, where FB + Scourge were the most picked comp by far, and the ones that did the best, as well as the ones that won every time. Clearly people totally can deal with them, they just all failed to do so. No, in reality its just not a comp you can beat.

ah, well I wasn't referencing 2v2s. no doubt it would be strong there, but its false to assume it would dominate team death match in bigger numbers given how gear works in pvp. obviously it would always be used since they both provide necessities, but its far from unkillable.

teef doesn't even destroy in 1v1. ok pal. this is death match we're talking about, obviously in conquest they lose. heard of staff teef in bigger groups?

In bigger numbers its actually still highly likely to dominate, it will just be rounded out with Warrior and maybe Revenants. There is a reason GvG tournaments tend to just ban Scourge and firebrand.

Staff thief? You mean Vaultspam, the bad gimmick build that would require very large groups to function, as your aim is for your animation to be drowned out by all the visual effects and animations going around you? Unless you plan to make TDM 15v15, Vaultspam remains really bad.

[aymnad.9023]

Conquest is quite balanced. I think it leaves room for a large variety of specs. I would not mind a Stronghold version with more players where you select your role before entering. First you attack then you defend. But is the playerbase ready to play and maybe loose a >20min match? I don't think so, I am even sure they are not.The PvP modes during events (bazar and winter) are nice/great but nobody/few people play them.So the answer is yes I do. But I am doubtful people will like/play them.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@UNOwen.7132 said:your aim is for your animation to be drowned out by all the visual effects and animations going around you? Unless you plan to make TDM 15v15, Vaultspam remains really bad.

maybe count dodges? it would work fine in 10v10. anyway i'm done derailing.

[UNOwen.7132]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:your aim is for your animation to be drowned out by all the visual effects and animations going around you? Unless you plan to make TDM 15v15, Vaultspam remains really bad.

maybe count dodges? it would work fine in 10v10. anyway i'm done derailing.

It wouldnt, in 10v10 the visual overload isnt big enough that people dont just see the Vaultspam thief and avoid his damage. The build relies on enemies not being able to see the attack coming, its terrible otherwise.

[Fueki.4753]

@"Stand The Wall.6987" said:the current balance can handle more modes. it wouldn't be pretty, but it would work.

And where would you get enough players to justify different modes?Conquest is craving enough for players that platinum players are matched against silver players.If there was to be an equally "popular" mode, it would end up matching top percentile players against bronze players.

New modes won't magically raise the player numbers in pvp.

[Psycoprophet.8107]

This is anet, make the polls but it will not come lol

[Stand The Wall.6987]

jeez zero reading comprehension.