32 replies to this topic

[GammaWolf]

Anet Game Designer Jonathan Sharp recently appeared Guru State of the Game  and outlined the future plans for GW2 sPvP.

From the perspective of a player who is considering returning, I think it is important to take a critical look at what the realistic future of spvp will look like.

The improvements that players should look forward to are:

1) Anet understands that rating and MMR is the number one thing that is needed and is shifting their focus
2) Private servers are still on the way, but are not the number 1 priority
2) The current tournament system as opposed to single ranked matches are here to stay
3) Solo queue is on the agenda, but it will still have pugs vs premades except with rating taken into account
4) Esports support like a better score card that shows actually useful information and observer mode are in the works
5) Glory changes that better connect spvp to the rest of the world are in development


The major issues that were not addressed in any significant detail include:

1) Dwindling population in Spvp and its effect on queue times and a ladder system
2) The negative effects that the tournament ticket micro-transaction scheme have had on the player base by creating monopoly teams and a giant skill gap
3) The lack of connection between sPvP and the rest of the game population
4) Unimpressive viewership levels
5) The massive challenge of fostering an esport many, many months after an MMO release date
6) Anets design philosophy of incremental change and releasing things 'when they are ready' has resulted in vague and unclear promises about how great things will be in the future provides little incentive for competitive players to play the present game as they are pretty much beta testers at this point.

I elaborate and offer my opinions on these subjects in the following video with the hope of giving players honest and realistic expectations for the future of spvp.

Edited by GammaWolf, 02 December 2012 - 03:38 AM.

[Aodan]

I would prefer to keep sPvP separate from the rest of the game and not have "The Mists" inter-act-able with anything else and it to continue to be basically a "separate" game, otherwise we face the same horrors of WoW.

I don't think the Ticket system is bad at all, it's probably one of the only fully working systems, as farming tickets makes you practice in free, and use the tickets/practice in paids.

The issue with Paids as addressed in your older vid, is that there is a large gap that many players can't close coming from a new player to becoming a vet. As addressed in the interview and by you, the lack of useful streams and decline in active teams/players in the community hurt that as well.

I only see the community coming back with Custom Arena, allowing for scrims, more intense streams, and outside tournies/ladders.

Their focus on a MMR/Better Raiting system won't help bring in new players or fix anything if the player base is so low that they still get paired up against unfair teams/players.

With Custom Arena there will be more buz about the game and more for the top teams to do and "promote" the game. A better MMR isn't going to change shiz

Edited by Aodan, 02 December 2012 - 03:51 AM.

[GammaWolf]

Yeah the main thing is rating and MMR, but I very much agree that these things don't matter if there isn't a large player base since newer teams will still end up getting matched against vets.

The pve resources in spvp idea is just meant to be another way to get people playing and queuing up. Instead of grinding karma events and dungeons, they could choose to grind in pvp. I should have been a bit more clear in that the gear and stats would still remain totally separate. The pve resources gained in pvp would only be usable in the pve/WvW side of the game and everything remains cosmetic differences only in spvp.

Letting people grind in pvp for pve only benefits would just bring in more players and have side benefits of generating more interest, increasing viewership, and reducing queue times. I admit its a somewhat crazy idea, but drastic measures will be necessary to bring people back 6 months down the line.

[Aodan]

GammaWolf, on 02 December 2012 - 06:36 AM, said:

Yeah the main thing is rating and MMR, but I very much agree that these things don't matter if there isn't a large player base since newer teams will still end up getting matched against vets.

The pve resources in spvp idea is just meant to be another way to get people playing and queuing up. Instead of grinding karma events and dungeons, they could choose to grind in pvp. I should have been a bit more clear in that the gear and stats would still remain totally separate. The pve resources gained in pvp would only be usable in the pve/WvW side of the game and everything remains cosmetic differences only in spvp.

Letting people grind in pvp for pve only benefits would just bring in more players and have side benefits of generating more interest, increasing viewership, and reducing queue times. I admit its a somewhat crazy idea, but drastic measures will be necessary to bring people back 6 months down the line.

I don't think the Karma in PvP is a bad idea, but although a good suggestion, like we agree on, it's not a solution.

I really don't believe a better MMR/Rating system is going to really change much if anything. The issue with the timeline is when they choose to release Custom Arena and what they do to retain their players.

Here's my personal issue with the game, esp with playing competitively in Paid currently:
I can play M/W/Sun during "prime" que times for Paids (6pm-11pm PST). During this time I can get in maybe 3-4 paid ques per day, this becomes even harder when trying to pug/find fillers as the player base is already low, and even lower if I want to find a good group that won't get stomped on the first map. I play Sat morning 10a-5pm PST and here and there in the mornings tu/thu but during that time there will never currently be any paid que, thus I'm stuck stomping in frees which is not good practice or good feedback.

(Basically always run dbl grd with a pug just to secure a win on the first map)

MMR if visible will actually only fracture the pvp community further.

Edited by Aodan, 02 December 2012 - 08:02 AM.

[Skyro]

Is this just a plug for your youtube videos or something?

Anyway one really interesting thing I gleaned from the SotG was that apparently there was a huge influx of players trying out the new map. I think that bodes very well for GW2's ability to possibly attract players to play the sPvP side of their game again. While MMR will help the learning curve of newer players, they need to add more content to keep people playing. And hopefully custom servers will be very customizable so that people can make new game modes, user maps, etc. That's how you keep an active population going. No matter how many systems you add to the game if everybody only plays on the same 3 maps all day it's going to get very old very fast for most players.

Edited by Skyro, 02 December 2012 - 08:03 AM.

[Aodan]

Skyro, on 02 December 2012 - 08:02 AM, said:

Is this just a plug for your youtube videos or something?

Anyway one really interesting thing I gleaned from the SotG was that apparently there was a huge influx of players trying out the new map. I think that bodes very well for GW2's ability to possibly attract players to play the sPvP side of their game again. While MMR will help the learning curve of newer players, they need to add more content to keep people playing. And hopefully custom servers will be very customizable so that people can make new game modes, user maps, etc. That's how you keep an active population going. No matter how many systems you add to the game if everybody only plays on the same 3 maps all day it's going to get very old very fast for more players.

Our argument both mine and OPs is that an better/revision of MMR in GW2 won't really attract players. That most of the surviability of GW2 sPvP hinges on custom arenas/obs mode.

I think if your hopes is that custom servers will be able to generate new game modes/user created maps you are delirious. The system Anet will be using for custom arena's will be similar to that of CoD/BF3 games where it is simply controlling/customizing presets within a server such as; Map Changes, Player Count, PW/noPW. At most they may even let us control Rez Timers/Spawn Timers/Spawns thus to self balance possible abuse issues in community/player ladders or tournies.  

There is no way Anet would let or should allow players to make custom content as this is not a server/custom arena ran on a chosen host that can be modded from the outside but Anet's own internal to allow players the ability to Scrim and use private space for competition.

The new map is a glimpse of what Anet may do for the more "casual" players. Competitive players don't mind consistent maps, because we would rather have a few, really balanced maps, than a bunch of unbalanced ones.

If you look at any competitive game, esp for example League of Legends, they have ONE competitive map and they are second to SC2 as far as Esports/Competitive Play.

[Skyro]

Yeah I said hoping, but by all indications so far from ANet the customization will be very limited. It's a shame though, the core gameplay is pretty fun and I'm sure it would mesh very well with different types of game modes. It would build up the playerbase much much more than anything else.

I'm not sure what your point is about competitive maps. SC2 rotate maps (both ladder and tournaments) all the time to keep the game fresh. I'm not sure about LoL I don't follow that game.

I also think you're severely overestimating the effect that custom areans/obs mode would have on the "survivability of GW2 sPvP." They are great features for an established game, GW2 is not even close to being established. The stream numbers are horrific. If nobody is interested in watching GW2 sPvP right now what makes you think people will flood Obs mode? The playerbase is simply too small right now. GW1 was by all accounts a pretty niche PvP game in itself, but even GW1 had a much bigger playerbase at a similar point in its lifespan, and it never picked up steam as an eSport. The only real tourneys GW1 had were those funded by ANet themselves.

And that's exactly why, if anything can save GW2 sPvP, it would be user-generated content. LoL in itself is a game mode from, guess what, user-generated content! It would be entirely different if GW2 was a pure PvP game and had the developer resources to match, but from all indications the pace at which sPvP is updated with balance, maps, and new features is IMO not frequent enough that sustain a large enough playerbase that would be able to support a true big-time eSport like SC2.

[the butcher]

I'd say they need to get those 'basic' features in and there will be more retention in the pvp scene. Then they need to promote spvp ingame to get some pve'ers/wvw's to try spvp. The thing they need to do then to attract lots of people is to announce there tournament with some nice cash rewards so lots of topteams will return and lots of new players will come in the game.

[GammaWolf]

Skyro, on 02 December 2012 - 08:02 AM, said:

Is this just a plug for your youtube videos or something?

Anyway one really interesting thing I gleaned from the SotG was that apparently there was a huge influx of players trying out the new map. I think that bodes very well for GW2's ability to possibly attract players to play the sPvP side of their game again. While MMR will help the learning curve of newer players, they need to add more content to keep people playing. And hopefully custom servers will be very customizable so that people can make new game modes, user maps, etc. That's how you keep an active population going. No matter how many systems you add to the game if everybody only plays on the same 3 maps all day it's going to get very old very fast for most players.

I could write a massive wall of text that no one will read, or I can throw some thoughts into a video that may be of interest to people who don't want sPvP to die and hopefully foster some intelligent discussion. I am not begging for subs or likes, and if no one cares about the subject matter then the thread can die or be modded.

Also, I imagine the whole point of a SOTG show is to foster discussion amongst the community and get people to come back. Unfortunately some media sites and future e-sport heroes tend to throw Anet a lot of softballs and don't really talk about the real issues so it falls on others who don't have a cozy relationship with the devs to do so.

The new map may have brought in people who tried it out for a weekend, but hot join is shallow and isn't retaining those players. It also isn't involved in competitive play which is the main issue that people are concerned about.

Custom servers are necessary, but they are hoping to monetize them which is pointless if you don't have any players to buy them. This strategy of monetizing the only forms of competition (paid tournaments, private servers) doesn't look like its going to have any mass appeal. Why would the average player who isn't aspiring to be e-famous and just wants to play competitive pvp spend money on an entry fee to just play the regular game? Their will to play lowers even more when they get stomped over and over by the usual suspects, which will continue to happen even with rating and MMR if there is no population.

Edited by GammaWolf, 03 December 2012 - 06:26 AM.

[GammaWolf]

the butcher, on 02 December 2012 - 11:07 AM, said:

I'd say they need to get those 'basic' features in and there will be more retention in the pvp scene. Then they need to promote spvp ingame to get some pve'ers/wvw's to try spvp. The thing they need to do then to attract lots of people is to announce there tournament with some nice cash rewards so lots of topteams will return and lots of new players will come in the game.

I agree entirely. My main worry is that by the time they get these things in the actual game, it will have been 6-12 months from release and people will have simply moved on.

[FBRin]

MMR definitely won't help it much with such a low pvp pop unless it is ridiculously broad for searching. At high ratings in WoW it could take a long time to find a match and that was with a massively bigger amount of people participating. Even then you'd still often get teams 200-300+ rating below you sometimes. Queue times in GW2 tpvp would be even more of a nightmare than they already are and would probably just end up driving even more people away since you'd still be getting stomped most likely thanks to the small pop.

[Aodan]

FBRin, on 03 December 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

MMR definitely won't help it much with such a low pvp pop unless it is ridiculously broad for searching. At high ratings in WoW it could take a long time to find a match and that was with a massively bigger amount of people participating. Even then you'd still often get teams 200-300+ rating below you sometimes. Queue times in GW2 tpvp would be even more of a nightmare than they already are and would probably just end up driving even more people away since you'd still be getting stomped most likely thanks to the small pop.

I have the exact same thought, thus why in sorely disappointed that anet has focused off of custom

[Happiness Factory]

Do you guys think MMR would work if it was only single matches? so it didnt have to look for 40 people in order to play?

[Seetherrr]

I completely disagree with your guys opinion on the effects of adding ratings and matchmaking.  Yes, if they simply added it to the current tournament system it wouldn't do anything but create longer queues.  However, if they were to implement a single match system for solo queuers and one for groups I think there would be a noticeable improvement in both the quality of matches being played and the number of matches being played.

Solo players have currently two options for SPvP, hot joins and joining free tournaments solo.  Hotjoins do not play anything like a tournament match and does not help a player learn anything but the most basics features of combat.  In the free tournaments the solo player is placed with random players and often faces a premade team which has a huge advantage simply due to the value of communication and cooridination in this game.  This setting is also not very conducive to getting better at the game but at least the vast majority of the players in these pug groups are trying to play the game "correctly" compared to hotjoins.  Even though solo queuers in free tournaments know they will lose in the first couple of rounds the vast majority of the time they still find it much more enjoyable than hotjoins.

I feel that if you segregated solo/duo players from teams you would provide a much better avenue for players to improve and hopefully make new friends which form into new teams.  Solo players tend to play in more sporadic intervals and the single match system would accomodate their time constraints much better than the tournaments which can have such a wide variation in their duration.

I think ArenaNet should copy the system used by smite in which matches are launched in time intervals set to coincide with the length of matches in order to faciliate better matchmaking.  For those unaware of the system, Smite, which is a MOBA style game has a normal match length of 30-45mins and they have ranked queues which occur on the hour.  Since matches are much shorter in GW2 the interval would be lowered down, while I haven't looked super closely at the average match length, I know the maximum is 15minutes, so an interval of around 10-15minutes might be ideal.

Teams emerge from players enjoying the game, striving to play better and wanting to play at a higher level, this becomes a natural evolution when you provide a solid pathway for players to progress and become interested in playing at a higher level, which I do not think the current system allows nor would it be alleviated by launching custom servers earlier.  The current system has produced an extremely stratified system in which most players fall on the horrendously bad spectrum with a small group of players that are far far beyond most of their competition with very few middling teams.

The newly formed teams need to be playing one another, and not just one match out of a whole days worth of tournament queues in which they face countless pug teams and a few teams which are far beyond their level of play.  This is something Jacobin and many others have touched on but there needs to be a sense of progression for players and I think individual skill progression would be much more meaningful and rewarding with a rating system and a segregated queueing system.

[FBRin]

Single matches would still run into the queue time problem. Unless you used a solo queue style without premades. However that wouldn't really solve the problem of getting a set team. I guess they could run a solo queue ladder with mmr and then have customs for scrims and paid tourneys for premades. At least that way high solo queue players could make teams with similarly rated players like what happens in NA's LoL scene.

[Skyro]

Seetherrr, on 03 December 2012 - 10:01 PM, said:

...

I think you'd be quite surprised how well a random team of competent people can match-up vs a premade. I've played in numerous random PUGs w/o using VOIP or randomly got matched up with a team of competent people and it's perfectly fine. The problem arises when you are matched up with people who are severely underskilled relative to your enemies. Splitting up queues for solo and premades would only lengthen queues times for no perceivable benefit.

MMR is much needed in this game to bring back the playerbase to healthy levels. Some people think custom servers means hardcore teams that quit will come back. No, it's going to be big money tourneys that will bring them back.

[Seetherrr]

Skyro, on 04 December 2012 - 01:12 AM, said:

I think you'd be quite surprised how well a random team of competent people can match-up vs a premade. I've played in numerous random PUGs w/o using VOIP or randomly got matched up with a team of competent people and it's perfectly fine. The problem arises when you are matched up with people who are severely underskilled relative to your enemies. Splitting up queues for solo and premades would only lengthen queues times for no perceivable benefit.

If your pug team is beating a premade team it is because your pug team is significantly better than the other team.  I did not say it is impossible, but I am saying its stupid to have a rating system that matches solo queued players against full premade teams.  Communication is extremely important in this game, more so than other games like MOBAs because you do not have "vision" on the map of enemies seen by your allies.
Splitting up queues allows for solo players to play and have a sense of achievement, their rating, while learning the tournament game more and hopefully making some friends from the matches they played in order to play in the full team rated play.  I don't think queue times would be effected because you would be eliminating the stupid tournament system which is a source of queue time problems of its own and because I think the playerbase would find solo queue more enjoyable than hotjoin.

[Skyro]

Seetherrr, on 04 December 2012 - 01:37 AM, said:

If your pug team is beating a premade team it is because your pug team is significantly better than the other team.  I did not say it is impossible, but I am saying its stupid to have a rating system that matches solo queued players against full premade teams.  Communication is extremely important in this game, more so than other games like MOBAs because you do not have "vision" on the map of enemies seen by your allies.
Splitting up queues allows for solo players to play and have a sense of achievement, their rating, while learning the tournament game more and hopefully making some friends from the matches they played in order to play in the full team rated play.  I don't think queue times would be effected because you would be eliminating the stupid tournament system which is a source of queue time problems of its own and because I think the playerbase would find solo queue more enjoyable than hotjoin.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. Maps are very small in this game and as long as people are familiar with what they are supposed to be doing the only communication that is absolutely necessary is calling out numbers of inc enemies. Look at streams of top teams, there is very little actual communication going on outside of that. Things like zerging rezzes or AoE'ing/interrupting enemy rez'ers or whatever are things that can be seen visually in the game. Communication is great and ofc beneficial but it is not as game breaking in this game as it is in others.

And whether you like it or not the tourney format is here to stay. It is one of the ways ANet has gone about monetizating the sPvP side of their game so it isn't going anywhere. The proposed MMR will be framed around the tourney structure.

[GammaWolf]

Seetherr is right. Get rid of the 40 person and 45 minute time requirement  that the present tournament system has and add single ranked matches and suddenly spvp becomes playable.

The problem is that this is counter to Anet's monetization strategy of selling tickets as an entry fee so they will resist making this change even though its desperately needed.


@Skryo

No idea why you are trying to justify the present system. It has failed by every conceivable measure - queue times, viewership, Anet's own QP post. If you really think that the few players who are left are going to just accept what we have presently, then have fun in an empty game. Anet themselves have admitted that big changes are necessary and he did state that solo matches were on the radar.

And defending pugs vs premades in what is supposed to be a 'competitive' game is beyond ridiculous. How do you think the teams that stream 12 hours a day got so good? It was through hours and hours of COMMUNICATION to the point where they know exactly what everyone is doing.

Edited by GammaWolf, 04 December 2012 - 02:36 AM.

[Skyro]

I'm not justifying the tourney system, I'm saying why it isn't going away. I'm a realist. How else is ANet going monetize sPvP? Sell hats? I, and just like every other serious PvP'er out there would obviously prefer the GW1 system of "MMR-matched, single-queue, lower ranked team gets pick of map" system. But that's not the point. Many people also despise the capture point game mode, but we know that's not going away either. We can wish things all day, doesn't mean it'll happen the way we want it.

And the Jonathan Sharp vaguely alluded to a single-queue system but was purposely vague. If it was a simple single-queue he would have just said so. Obviously there's something more to it, and how likely do you think that something has to do with finding a way to monetize it?

And the teams that play all day are good because... THEY PLAY ALL DAY. I saw one time (PZ I think? I forget) run a 4 or 5 necro team in paids and got to the final round, and nobody on the team knew how to use necros. I guarantee you if MMR is implemented correctly PUG vs premade will not be big deal at all. Hypothetically if it was single queue then sure, go ahead split solo queue and premades up because queue times isn't a big concern in that type of system, but in the tourney system structure, which is what we have to deal with for the forseeable future, it just isn't worth it. Jonathan Sharp already said it's going to be this way anyway, so this whole conversation is pointless.

[rektlol]

The idea is that older players will come back. I know me and my team definitely will when MMR is employed as well as seasons and ladders. We stopped playing due to lack of competitiveness and I can guarantee when it becomes competitive again more and more people will play again.

Also more game modes, conquest gets incredibly boring and is very 1 dimensional. They could make a DotA style game mode which could be fun as well as CTF or even just a pure deathmatch arena style.

[FoxBat]

Skyro, on 04 December 2012 - 05:31 AM, said:

How else is ANet going monetize sPvP? Sell hats?

That is more or less what they should do, yes. For example, dye system is supposedly in the works, and it would make far more sense to monetize that than tournies/servers. If for no other reason than its something you could sell to casual hotjoins alot easier than tournaments. Alot of competitive players are not the ones whose lives are tied up in some busy, high-paying job, so Anet is missing out on exactly the types that make cash shops so lucrative.

Their competitive product isn't nearly enticing enough to fit the monetization scheme they are trying. It's like trying to charge a subscription and realizing you have to go F2P because what you offer just plain isn't desirable enough.

Edited by FoxBat, 05 December 2012 - 03:12 AM.

[Aodan]

I just love how they are continuing on with implementing a worthless rank system that won't change anything as the player base is too low. Also all solo que is going to do is make it a bit easier for newbs to enjoy the game, they will still get stomped trying to enter the competitive scene, much like League and Dota2. They need to focus on giving the competitive players the tools to make better streams and tournaments/ladders outside of Anets crap tournament system so that fresh blood comes in from seeing the competitions and streams. Also possibly so people who have left come back

http://www.quickmeme.com/meme/3s2wcd/

They better do something spectacular in the next two months if they expect to get back even half of the community that's left. Me I'm personally on my last bit, I log on simply to do some paids when I feel like it or friends ask me. Otherwise I've gone back to D3 to make money instead of waste my time trying to build a team or be part of the die'n competitive scene.

Edited by Aodan, 07 December 2012 - 02:51 AM.

[Featherman]

My problem with the game, in addition to the ones listed by TC, is that the current point-capture game mode is lacking in depth. It only provides a few ways to play, and this is pretty much evident in how most of the class discussion is nothing more than "how can X profession beat X profession."

As mentioned before, Dota-esque games only need one map to be competitive and this could be true for GW2. But consideration must be taken in how that one map used in Dota games allows for so many different strategies and interactions with different heroes, and how the meta built around that map takes into account much more than "how can x hero beat x hero."

As for rankings, MMR and those much needed features, I don't think anything short of making sPvP a free to play feature of the game will salvage it at this point. At least then there will be a steady playerbase that will promote interest and viewership in the game; the qualities that are required for any game to be competitive. The features they promise will mean nothing if there's no one using them. And for ANet's tournament system to work as they intended, they're going to need the steady playerbase a F2P model would provide.

Edited by Featherman, 09 December 2012 - 12:32 PM.

[the butcher]

Well i think MMR/rank might increase the numbers greatly in pvp. I'm a pretty pvp newb in GW2 and I'm solely not doing tournies 'cus I don't always have time to find a full roster/don't get accepted in teams/the stomping that's happening from what I hear. We'll see in a month or 2.

[Skolops]

I have to say that I think the biggest problem with the sPvP in this game wasn't even mentioned: the sPvP in this game just isn't very good, for a variety of reasons.

The point capture system is incredibly shallow, and not just because there's only one style of map.  Compare the tactics concerned with capturing points in GW2 to the enormous variety and the overall teamwork and various subtleties involved with doing it in a game like SWtOR.  It really isn't even close.

The way the system works also simply encourages zerging more than smart objective oriented play.  The strongest tactic seems to be to roam around in a pack rather than to use a solid opening to capture points efficiently and then play smart defense to hold them - or, if you don't like that style, to do anything else, really, other than zerg around.

The PvP in GW2 also feels a lot more like PvAI than anything.  In any given match, at least 50% of the things you're fighting with, and sometimes remarkably more, are AI NPCs.  Pets, Minions, Illusions, Turrets, Elementals... PvPers want to, well PvP, not PvCPU.

This also leads to the entire map just being a gigantic mess.  One of the reasons that PvPers tend to prefer smaller team sizes - like 5 v 5 - as opposed to larger ones - like 8 v 8 or 10 v 10 - is that it emphasizes player skill more.  However, with the current (and, without changing the entire game dramatically, irrevocable) class design a 5 v 5 can easily turn into a 20 v 20.  Trying to PvP with a clogged up, mess of a screen is simply neither fun not especially conducive to more skilled play.

There are other items I could mention, but suffice it to say that in the end its just not a PvP I'd find worth playing even if the balance were perfect, the MMR system was ideal, and all of these other oft-discussed features were implemented.  In SWtOR, I was one of those people that was playing for 10+ hours a day and investing an enormous amount of time into it.  I got GW2 because when so many PvPers made the decision to jump into that game, I wanted to play it the same way.  After a month or two, I just stopped PvPing altogether because its simply not... fun, or good, or well designed.  I'm now back playing that old game again, and it's amazing how much more I feel like I'm actually engaged in serious PvP compared to what I was getting in GW2.

Edited by Skolops, 09 December 2012 - 02:30 PM.

[Aodan]

the butcher, on 09 December 2012 - 01:57 PM, said:

Well i think MMR/rank might increase the numbers greatly in pvp. I'm a pretty pvp newb in GW2 and I'm solely not doing tournies 'cus I don't always have time to find a full roster/don't get accepted in teams/the stomping that's happening from what I hear. We'll see in a month or 2.

Custom Arenas would bolster the the game 30x more than a improved MMR/Rank system for these reasons:
1. It would provide a "practice ground" for everyone
2. It would provide competitive players a place to compete and not have free be there only practice (stomp tournies free)
3. It would provide streamers, tournaments, and leagues to flourish and attract new and old players back


All a MMR system or "improved" one will do is make it slightly less likely you'll que up against really good players, but you still will, because the the pool of players is small. Paids your suppose to eventually go up against really good players, but as of now even the QP system is pointless as those who are at the top will stay there.

[the butcher]

Do we have any real info on how custom arena's are going to work? Will it be like counter-strike where we'll see player hosted servers (the custom ones) among the Anet servers? So there'll be pubs too and the possibility to put a password, etc. on it?

[Aodan]

the butcher, on 09 December 2012 - 08:47 PM, said:

Do we have any real info on how custom arena's are going to work? Will it be like counter-strike where we'll see player hosted servers (the custom ones) among the Anet servers? So there'll be pubs too and the possibility to put a password, etc. on it?

Anet will more than likely monetize the servers much like you saw happen with Call Of Duty, where they basically rent out servers to players.

There will be pubs, scrim servers, tournament servers, basically just like you've seen in the CoD/GO scene.

The problem with it is that, from my best guess is they want to have an spectator/obs mode in the game for use with the private servers instead of just releasing the private servers.

IMHO if they don't want the community to continue to shrink, they should release these servers ASAP and add the obs/spec later.

[ltkAlpha]

Introducing custom arenas. or anything else that would fragment the player population for that matter, would be a major misstep. If we have well implemented modes and rankings it isn't necessary. If we don't - it won't matter and PvP will just... continue in its current direction.