Removal of 3v3

Why do we care if one side gets way more engagement?

"BubbaFett;c-2428544" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428524" wrote:
I'd argue CG implementing 3v3 took away from those of us that liked it when it was all 5v5. CG could always run them concurrently and let us all sign up for the one we prefer.

This doesn't work when the entire premise of GAC is to pit the entire player base against itself and reward based on ranking....

Then CG could just remove 3v3 from the game... or redefine their premise.

"BubbaFett;c-2428571" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428557" wrote:

"BubbaFett;c-2428544" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428524" wrote:
I'd argue CG implementing 3v3 took away from those of us that liked it when it was all 5v5. CG could always run them concurrently and let us all sign up for the one we prefer.

This doesn't work when the entire premise of GAC is to pit the entire player base against itself and reward based on ranking....

Then CG could just remove 3v3 from the game... or redefine their premise.

Or just keep things as they are.....

Or don't becuase many people don't like 3v3. I've heard two arguments here against letting players choose. One is that 3v3 would be underpopulated because people don't like it as much (not much of an argument for forcing people to play it). The other is that it goes against some premise that is hardly set in stone.

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428526" wrote:
Why do we care if one side gets way more engagement?

Because it then erodes both sides. You don't like 3v3? Well, good news, it's already optional. Just don't play it.

"StarSon;c-2428577" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428526" wrote:
Why do we care if one side gets way more engagement?

Because it then erodes both sides. You don't like 3v3? Well, good news, it's already optional. Just don't play it.

I didn't complain about it being "mandatory".

I don't dislike 3v3, I just like it significantly less than 5v5. Under the current system, my favorite game mode is significantly reduced.

To be clear, I'm not advocating for removing 3v3, just letting players choose. Having the choice would make you unhappy?

Fair enough. Will settle for our mutual hope that CG is working on new goodies :)

You don't speak for me, OP. I enjoy 3v3 as much as 5v5. 5v5 was the same slog every single week. 3v3 adds a little variety to the game mode.

Please remember that not everything is for you. You are not necessarily the target audience for everything in this game, and neither am I. And that's OK.

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428576" wrote:

"BubbaFett;c-2428571" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428557" wrote:

"BubbaFett;c-2428544" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428524" wrote:
I'd argue CG implementing 3v3 took away from those of us that liked it when it was all 5v5. CG could always run them concurrently and let us all sign up for the one we prefer.

This doesn't work when the entire premise of GAC is to pit the entire player base against itself and reward based on ranking....

Then CG could just remove 3v3 from the game... or redefine their premise.

Or just keep things as they are.....

Or don't becuase many people don't like 3v3. I've heard two arguments here against letting players choose. One is that 3v3 would be underpopulated because people don't like it as much (not much of an argument for forcing people to play it). The other is that it goes against some premise that is hardly set in stone.

Or third option: Because many DO actually like it. Read the comments... way more commenting they like than dislike. I personally Love 3v3 more. It's a game mode. Not all people will like all game modes. Cool thing is you don't have to play or participate in all the modes. I don't participate in TW. See choices. Good for the longevity of the game and not burning out the player base.

"Starslayer;c-2428737" wrote:

"Lumiya;c-2428581" wrote:

"StarSon;c-2428577" wrote:

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428526" wrote:
Why do we care if one side gets way more engagement?

Because it then erodes both sides. You don't like 3v3? Well, good news, it's already optional. Just don't play it.

I wouldn't agree that it is optional because it is a source (for some even the main source) for crystals.

Not really a problem in the current system where players (except at the top of k1) tend to 50% win rate by design.

"Ragnarok_COTF;c-2428664" wrote:
The ones that are happy to choose the mode they prefer. Presumably, most would be happy playing their preferred mode all the time.

Gac test player skill in fleet, 3v3 and 5v5. If i’m better/worse in any aspect it will affect my general performance. Choosing only one to compete in is a possibility, but it will make me unhappy (big word, let’s say very, very slightly upset) as i enjoy the current game mode. I’ll risk an analogy: gac is triathlon; if someone doesn’t like swimming, they could propose to choose between swimming and running to go with cycling, but it’s a different sport then.

I hate analogies, but... these choices already exist. Some runners specialize in a single event, some try multiple, some don't focus on track because they can make more money playing a different sport, etc.

Right now, you have everyone forced into the triathlon. Folks that despise 3v3 take losses they could otherwise win because they can't be bothered. So you already don't have the competitive integrity you seem to desire.