I like 3vs3

"Ghost666;d-267634" wrote:

There is no big balance issue i can identify...some things work different, but it is the same for all players.

In a vacuum, perhaps. In the system we have, absolutely not. 3v3 and 5v5 are balanced differently. So, if we had separate rankings for 3v3 and 5v5, I'd probably share your sentiment, but we don't. Some accounts/players are better served by the balance in 5v5, some by 3v3. Some have different effort levels. As a result, some of us would be better served by a separate SR for each mode. For me, my 5v5 SR would likely be around 100-200 higher than my 3v3. At the start of most 3v3 seasons, I run into a 3v3 buzz saw that would actually be interesting in 5v5. At the start of each 5v5, I usually have easy fights that would have been appropriate for 3v3.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind 3v3 if it were elective and I had a separate SR for that mode. I'd actually choose it as a pseudo-break during holiday seasons.

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2453299" wrote:

"el_mago;c-2453294" wrote:
As for your comment: "Some accounts/players are better served by the balance in 5v5, some by 3v3."

Can you elaborate?

Ben's 3rd omi is a great example. That is the least-applied Ben omi in the game. In 5v5, it rarely has a meaningful impact. In 3v3, it definitely can. Rey mirrors in 3v3 are trivial if your opponent doesn't have it and dicey if they do.

ogCal can shut down the current Malicos vs Rey counter in 3v3. In 5v5, not so much.

SK is worse in 3v3 than 5v5.

Tuskens are better in 3v3 than 5v5 if you have the Raider cron.

Aphra is worse in 3v3 than 5v5 (less so now because of her DC, but not everyone can get that).

BH and Veers are better in 5v5.

Limited party slots means you often have to forego a tank or support or 2nd damage dealer. Therefore, if you are at a large DC/relic disadvantage, fewer allies can make it harder to overcome. A classic example that isn't particularly relevant now was the GAS mirror. In 5v5, it was beyond trivial. In 3v3, it no longer was because the AI was more likely to accidentally target wisely (fewer decoys).

Etc...

"el_mago;c-2453294" wrote:
My question would ask how that affects balance at all.

Not sure I understand exactly what this question is asking. Can you clarify, please?

You had written:
"In a vacuum, perhaps. In the system we have, absolutely not. 3v3 and 5v5 are balanced differently."

I guess my question pertained to what you meant by balanced differently. What you just explained seemed to answer my question.

However, I feel like you might be leaning toward this balance being a negative thing. I don't believe that it is negative - it just is. Yes, 3v3 is different (for reasons you just outlined and i'm sure there are more), but this difference applies to everyone, so (in my mind), it's not really unbalanced.

Yes, some accounts/players are better benefited in 3v3 or 5v5, but I feel like that's more a player choice/resource management issue than anything inherent in the specific game mode itself.

"el_mago;c-2453305" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2453299" wrote:

"el_mago;c-2453294" wrote:
As for your comment: "Some accounts/players are better served by the balance in 5v5, some by 3v3."

Can you elaborate?

Ben's 3rd omi is a great example. That is the least-applied Ben omi in the game. In 5v5, it rarely has a meaningful impact. In 3v3, it definitely can. Rey mirrors in 3v3 are trivial if your opponent doesn't have it and dicey if they do.

ogCal can shut down the current Malicos vs Rey counter in 3v3. In 5v5, not so much.

SK is worse in 3v3 than 5v5.

Tuskens are better in 3v3 than 5v5 if you have the Raider cron.

Aphra is worse in 3v3 than 5v5 (less so now because of her DC, but not everyone can get that).

BH and Veers are better in 5v5.

Limited party slots means you often have to forego a tank or support or 2nd damage dealer. Therefore, if you are at a large DC/relic disadvantage, fewer allies can make it harder to overcome. A classic example that isn't particularly relevant now was the GAS mirror. In 5v5, it was beyond trivial. In 3v3, it no longer was because the AI was more likely to accidentally target wisely (fewer decoys).

Etc...

"el_mago;c-2453294" wrote:
My question would ask how that affects balance at all.

Not sure I understand exactly what this question is asking. Can you clarify, please?

You had written:
"In a vacuum, perhaps. In the system we have, absolutely not. 3v3 and 5v5 are balanced differently."

I guess my question pertained to what you meant by balanced differently. What you just explained seemed to answer my question.

However, I feel like you might be leaning toward this balance being a negative thing. I don't believe that it is negative - it just is. Yes, 3v3 is different (for reasons you just outlined and i'm sure there are more), but this difference applies to everyone, so (in my mind), it's not really unbalanced.

Yes, some accounts/players are better benefited in 3v3 or 5v5, but I feel like that's more a player choice/resource management issue than anything inherent in the specific game mode itself.

I perceive it as negative based on the reasons I outlined. It's not because it's inherently unfair. As you said, others are in the same boat. And any "extra" losses I suffer in 3v3 are eventually offset in a later 5v5. I don't feel like we disagree here.

My point is that part of my frustration with 3v3 is due to often being very overmatched at the start of a 3v3 season (because of the differences discussed earlier as well as player engagement and other intangibles). And I think my frustration could be mitigated with a separate 3v3 SR, thus improving my enjoyment of 3v3.

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2453291" wrote:

"Ghost666;d-267634" wrote:

There is no big balance issue i can identify...some things work different, but it is the same for all players.

In a vacuum, perhaps. In the system we have, absolutely not. 3v3 and 5v5 are balanced differently. So, if we had separate rankings for 3v3 and 5v5, I'd probably share your sentiment, but we don't. Some accounts/players are better served by the balance in 5v5, some by 3v3. Some have different effort levels. As a result, some of us would be better served by a separate SR for each mode. For me, my 5v5 SR would likely be around 100-200 higher than my 3v3. At the start of most 3v3 seasons, I run into a 3v3 buzz saw that would actually be interesting in 5v5. At the start of each 5v5, I usually have easy fights that would have been appropriate for 3v3.

Honestly, I wouldn't mind 3v3 if it were elective and I had a separate SR for that mode. I'd actually choose it as a pseudo-break during holiday seasons.

I'm not the biggest fan of 3v3, but I sorta like that it breaks the monotony. I would rather have it once per quarter than every other month.

As for your comment: "Some accounts/players are better served by the balance in 5v5, some by 3v3."

Can you elaborate? I understand what I believe to be the basic premise that some accounts lend themselves better toward one or the other. My question would ask how that affects balance at all.

"el_mago;c-2453294" wrote:
As for your comment: "Some accounts/players are better served by the balance in 5v5, some by 3v3."

Can you elaborate?

Ben's 3rd omi is a great example. That is the least-applied Ben omi in the game. In 5v5, it rarely has a meaningful impact. In 3v3, it definitely can. Rey mirrors in 3v3 are trivial if your opponent doesn't have it and dicey if they do.

ogCal can shut down the current Malicos vs Rey counter in 3v3. In 5v5, not so much.

SK is worse in 3v3 than 5v5.

Tuskens are better in 3v3 than 5v5 if you have the Raider cron.

Aphra is worse in 3v3 than 5v5 (less so now because of her DC, but not everyone can get that).

BH and Veers are better in 5v5.

Limited party slots means you often have to forego a tank or support or 2nd damage dealer. Therefore, if you are at a large DC/relic disadvantage, fewer allies can make it harder to overcome. A classic example that isn't particularly relevant now was the GAS mirror. In 5v5, it was beyond trivial. In 3v3, it no longer was because the AI was more likely to accidentally target wisely (fewer decoys).

Etc...

"el_mago;c-2453294" wrote:
My question would ask how that affects balance at all.

Not sure I understand exactly what this question is asking. Can you clarify, please?

I like 3v3 too. It would get stale fast to have only 5v5 gac, this mix it up a bit and provides variety. I agree that are no big balance issues with the format, some teams perform differently in 3v3 than 5v5 but that is another story (and it’s fine that they do).

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2453310" wrote:

"el_mago;c-2453305" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2453299" wrote:

"el_mago;c-2453294" wrote:
As for your comment: "Some accounts/players are better served by the balance in 5v5, some by 3v3."

Can you elaborate?

Ben's 3rd omi is a great example. That is the least-applied Ben omi in the game. In 5v5, it rarely has a meaningful impact. In 3v3, it definitely can. Rey mirrors in 3v3 are trivial if your opponent doesn't have it and dicey if they do.

ogCal can shut down the current Malicos vs Rey counter in 3v3. In 5v5, not so much.

SK is worse in 3v3 than 5v5.

Tuskens are better in 3v3 than 5v5 if you have the Raider cron.

Aphra is worse in 3v3 than 5v5 (less so now because of her DC, but not everyone can get that).

BH and Veers are better in 5v5.

Limited party slots means you often have to forego a tank or support or 2nd damage dealer. Therefore, if you are at a large DC/relic disadvantage, fewer allies can make it harder to overcome. A classic example that isn't particularly relevant now was the GAS mirror. In 5v5, it was beyond trivial. In 3v3, it no longer was because the AI was more likely to accidentally target wisely (fewer decoys).

Etc...

"el_mago;c-2453294" wrote:
My question would ask how that affects balance at all.

Not sure I understand exactly what this question is asking. Can you clarify, please?

You had written:
"In a vacuum, perhaps. In the system we have, absolutely not. 3v3 and 5v5 are balanced differently."

I guess my question pertained to what you meant by balanced differently. What you just explained seemed to answer my question.

However, I feel like you might be leaning toward this balance being a negative thing. I don't believe that it is negative - it just is. Yes, 3v3 is different (for reasons you just outlined and i'm sure there are more), but this difference applies to everyone, so (in my mind), it's not really unbalanced.

Yes, some accounts/players are better benefited in 3v3 or 5v5, but I feel like that's more a player choice/resource management issue than anything inherent in the specific game mode itself.

I perceive it as negative based on the reasons I outlined. It's not because it's inherently unfair. As you said, others are in the same boat. And any "extra" losses I suffer in 3v3 are eventually offset in a later 5v5. I don't feel like we disagree here.

My point is that part of my frustration with 3v3 is due to often being very overmatched at the start of a 3v3 season (because of the differences discussed earlier as well as player engagement and other intangibles). And I think my frustration could be mitigated with a separate 3v3 SR, thus improving my enjoyment of 3v3.

Ok, that seems fair. I think a separate 3v3 SR seems like a good place to start - not sure I trust CG to implement something like that, but it doesn't seem like a bad idea on its face.