Superior Mini Season

[Tycura.1982]

2v2 vs 3v3? for me it's 3v3.

[Dantheman.3589]

I’m having a little more fun, but I’m not sure if that means 3s > 2s.

[TeqkOneStylez.8047]

I think 2vs2 is easily better. Guild Wars 2 combat gets polluted real quick when you add numbers. 2vs2 you can just find 1 friend ( which shouldn't be hard ), and then go slaying.

Not relying on random also means you can create and experiment with your own duo build comps which should be part of the fun of the game if the season wasn't 2 seconds long...

make2vs2perma

[ArthurDent.9538]

I'm having more fun in 3's but that may have more to do with not having to deal with double pre nerf core necro tanks.

[georgessj.4198]

@Tycura.1982 said:2v2 vs 3v3? for me it's 3v3.

2 vs 2 because the less people and bot users you have to carry the better

[White Kitsunee.4620]

2v2 for sure for me.3v3 has alot stronger team comps, and makes tempest and murderball absurdly strong.3v3 is still ultra fun since team compositions are fun, I just prefer 2v2s which is more focused on just being good at combat.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

Uuuuum, there are pros & cons here:

2v2 Pros

• Easier to find 1 person to queue with.
• Solo queue 2v2 isn't as futile as solo 3v3.

2v2 Cons

• 2v2 dynamic was so narrow, mostly due to particular classes being too dominant in small closed quarters maps.
• The revive power during 2v2 was way way way too high.

---

3v3 Pros

• 3 man comps provided more dynamic in team compositions.
• Matches end faster because there are more people to CC players off revives and more DPS cleave. Usually when the first person goes down they get cleaved quickly and the match generally is GG for the 3v2 afterwards. I didn't see many matches actually go to the timer in 3v3.

3v3 Cons

• Solo queue was an insurmountable nightmare. A player who could be participating at a 1550-1600 level if he was very picky and waited for good 3 man comps would only be around 1400-1450 if he solo queued, sometimes lower. Which brings me to the next point:
• It became a 3 man premade game mode only if you wanted to play for rating that was above 1450-1500. People who were not in 3 man comps just sort of stopped participating. This led to people sitting around and trying to wait for friends to log in, which = a lot of sitting around and not playing. The only people who were solo queue during this 3v3 season were the players who truly didn't care about their rating at all.
• All in all the 3v3 felt kind of bad for players who didn't consistently have good players online to team with all of the time. The organization to do so started feeling a little too close to organized AT scheduling, which is something that a lot of players do not like to take on with their scheduling.

---

But aside from 2v2 vs. 3v3 comparison, there are a few serious problems that are making these two game modes much less fun than they should be:

1. The population participating is way too low.
2. This makes players who are normally used to playing oh let's say 1500-1600 range rather frustrated when they are being forced down into 1400 or lower margins because every other game they queue is against Team USA or Zyn or some otherwise strong group of players tied to a streamer who are always online, and then however it's happening, they only get +10 on wins but -14 on loses while being down in like 1400. <- This is seriously making many players have the attitude that they'd rather not play at all if how the rating margins are working is going to make them look bad. This is probably the biggest reason why participation is so low. It's time for Arenanet to consider putting a hard wall limitation on what margins can be paired together. No player should be placed with or against another player that is 150 rating higher or lower. And if very high rated players want to argue that "their queue times will be too long" then I'd argue that maybe they should try queueing against each other then, rather than avoiding each other and only running matches against bell curve or lower opponents. They wouldn't have long queue times if they stopped avoiding each other, seeing as how these guys are online all of the time every day.
3. There is way way way too much alt account play going on that is creating too many problematic issues with how the algorithm is supposed to function and general throw play.

I don't know, we have a lot of problems here going into year 9. I think Arenanet needs to restructure quite a few things. I'll save that discussion for another place & another time.

[Dark Red Killian.3946]

I wasn’t part of 2v2 but I really like 3v3. Just wish you had an extra week to grind ascended shards so I don’t have to cram all I want in two weeks -_-.

[Poledra Val.1490]

I think people need to take 2v2 and 3v3 with a pinch of salt its nothing but a distraction to what pvp is actually balanced on, conquest. In my opinion deathmatch in gw2 is just utter garbage due to class stacking, inbalance, solo queing is almost an impossibility in these mini seasons and obviously Anet will never balance around these mini seasons and rightly so, since its a waste of time to do so.

[Trevor Boyer.6524]

@Jayden Reese.9542 said:They both suck. Until there's a separation between solo and team que it's pointless for anyone that like's to solo compete. It's just 2 or 3 dudes swapping to fotm and class stacking so if you didn't like necro/guard and now 2 revs/gaurd you end up at twice the disadvantage just playing what you enjoy. At least in 5s there's a chance to overcome duo's but no 3 solo dudes of equal rating going to even 50/50 vs trios. I will skip all mini seasons

@Poledra Val.1490 said:I think people need to take 2v2 and 3v3 with a pinch of salt its nothing but a distraction to what pvp is actually balanced on, conquest. In my opinion deathmatch in gw2 is just utter garbage due to class stacking, inbalance, solo queing is almost an impossibility in these mini seasons and obviously Anet will never balance around these mini seasons and rightly so, since its a waste of time to do so.

That narrow class/build viability is aaaaall due to the map design though.

In a 2v2 3v3 map, thieves & rangers are useless vs. condi heralds and Tempests. But in a big open field in wvw, condi heralds & tempests are sitting ducks vs. thieves and rangers. <- That is absolutely true.

It's not that the class/build balance is upset here. It's that the terrain provided completely discourages builds based around mobility/ranged. Arenanet needs to:

1. Open the maps up a bit. There needs to be more room for builds that rely upon mobility for combat.
2. Add no-port spots.
3. Add objects to jump up onto for ranged attackers to take positions where they can actually utilize ranged attacks. All 3 of the maps actually are designed to where ranged attackers cannot get an opening on an opponent unless the opponent seriously messes up, and the ranged attacker has to take a great risk getting into the middle of the combat to even utilize its ranged attacks.

Every single aspect of these 3 maps completely discourages the use of mobile/ranged/sneaky/tricky builds. The meta team comps for these 3 maps is pretty much the same things that you'd use in a wvw zerg. And that's too bad for 2v2s and 3v3s. It would honestly be a lot more fun if precision-play based classes/builds like Ranger/Thief/Mesmer were viable.

[White Kitsunee.4620]

2v2 imo.2v2 was less about building a good comp and felt a little more pure.Both are considerably better then conquest though.

[Shao.7236]

Most people having mixed feelings about 2v2 is likely due to the many glaring problems balance had which some were fixed. I prefer 2v2 because 3v3 only multiply the issues of 2v2.

[Ovark.2514]

@Trevor Boyer.6524 said:Uuuuum, there are pros & cons here:Guess the only way forward is 2v3

[Faux Play.6104]

I thought 2v2 was better but can't click on the poll right.