For the love of god, make frontlines 24vs24 instead of 24vs24vs24

[Cesarion]

Now you may ask yourself "Why, whats the problem with it?"

Pretty simple, imagine this scenario.

Your team is at 702 points and the enemy team is at 700 points, both are currently fighting and the third team who is at 100 points decides "Well uuh, that one team has 2 points more than the other one, so lets sandwich them and make them lose."

Most of the time it doesnt even take that for you to lose sometimes your team has 500 points while the enemy has 700, and yet the damn 3rd team still attacks the team with 500 points just because they either tunnelvision or dont like the color of your GC.

In 70% of my PVP games these scenarios happen, and I am just sick of losing because of the arbritary decisions of the third team

[Deveryn]

I'd rather see smaller teams and less / no XP bonus. Some of us like the different objectives and trying to win.

[Cesarion]

I am also fine with 8vs8vs8, I had a 90% winrate with my shotcalling back then when it was still available

[Kuroka]

Yes please... cut it down to two groups and while at it, greatly reduce exp...

[GordonGeeko]

Having 2 teams instead of 3 is not the solution, it will just make games worse. Let me explain.

If you only had two teams, they would rush at each other from the start. In theory, if both teams had equal skills, you'd pretty much be at a stalemate. However, that's not how it will go most of the time. One team will have better player and will just decimate the other team and get some battle high. You'll know right away that the other team is better. Some of your players that died will have just given up and every single battle after that will be lost.

Having 3 teams is what is supposed to make it fair. That way, 2nd place and 3rd place can work together to lower the points of 1st place and catching up. Now, of course, that's not how it currently goes, but that's a player issue, not a design issue. Japanese players use that 3-team system how it should be and games are pretty much always close. There's no design that will make games better until the players get better and start to care.

Rival Wings is 2 teams and look how it goes. It's either you stomp or you get stomped, you very rarely get anything in between, at least on NA. Casual CC is the same, 2 teams and 95% of games are steamrolled by one side. Ranked Crystal Conflict can be close more often because the players are supposed to all have higher skills.

The solution is not to increase or decrease the number of teams/players, it's to make the players better (or keep the bad ones away).

[Duskane]

yeah game mode would be much more enjoyable if it was 2 team game
grand company aspect is dead and no map would need a rework to accommodate with also the possibility of putting rival wings in the daily roulette.

[Duskane]

Having 2 teams instead of 3 is not the solution, it will just make games worse. Let me explain.

If you only had two teams, they would rush at each other from the start. In theory, if both teams had equal skills, you'd pretty much be at a stalemate. However, that's not how it will go most of the time. One team will have better player and will just decimate the other team and get some battle high. You'll know right away that the other team is better. Some of your players that died will have just given up and every single battle after that will be lost.

Having 3 teams is what is supposed to make it fair. That way, 2nd place and 3rd place can work together to lower the points of 1st place and catching up. Now, of course, that's not how it currently goes, but that's a player issue, not a design issue. Japanese players use that 3-team system how it should be and games are pretty much always close. There's no design that will make games better until the players get better and start to care.

Rival Wings is 2 teams and look how it goes. It's either you stomp or you get stomped, you very rarely get anything in between, at least on NA. Casual CC is the same, 2 teams and 95% of games are steamrolled by one side. Ranked Crystal Conflict can be close more often because the players are supposed to all have higher skills.

The solution is not to increase or decrease the number of teams/players, it's to make the players better (or keep the bad ones away).

I'd much rather a steam roll than just 2 teams fighting while other sits back and wins.

[Deveryn]

3 teams is way more interesting. It's even possible to have a 3 way tie for first. If you want your two team options, they're out there. Rival Wings is coming back in 6.2

[Lieri]

Having 2 teams instead of 3 is not the solution, it will just make games worse. Let me explain.

If you only had two teams, they would rush at each other from the start. In theory, if both teams had equal skills, you'd pretty much be at a stalemate. However, that's not how it will go most of the time. One team will have better player and will just decimate the other team and get some battle high. You'll know right away that the other team is better. Some of your players that died will have just given up and every single battle after that will be lost.

Having 3 teams is what is supposed to make it fair. That way, 2nd place and 3rd place can work together to lower the points of 1st place and catching up. Now, of course, that's not how it currently goes, but that's a player issue, not a design issue. Japanese players use that 3-team system how it should be and games are pretty much always close. There's no design that will make games better until the players get better and start to care.

Rival Wings is 2 teams and look how it goes. It's either you stomp or you get stomped, you very rarely get anything in between, at least on NA. Casual CC is the same, 2 teams and 95% of games are steamrolled by one side. Ranked Crystal Conflict can be close more often because the players are supposed to all have higher skills.

The solution is not to increase or decrease the number of teams/players, it's to make the players better (or keep the bad ones away).

Then remove battle high and copy WoW battleground where skills, coordination and respawn timer/place determine the game. Rather than avoiding stalemate by putting 3 teams. I would love frontline if its FFXIV version of WoW battleground.

[Cesarion]

Having 2 teams instead of 3 is not the solution, it will just make games worse. Let me explain.

If you only had two teams, they would rush at each other from the start. In theory, if both teams had equal skills, you'd pretty much be at a stalemate. However, that's not how it will go most of the time. One team will have better player and will just decimate the other team and get some battle high. You'll know right away that the other team is better. Some of your players that died will have just given up and every single battle after that will be lost.

Having 3 teams is what is supposed to make it fair. That way, 2nd place and 3rd place can work together to lower the points of 1st place and catching up. Now, of course, that's not how it currently goes, but that's a player issue, not a design issue. Japanese players use that 3-team system how it should be and games are pretty much always close. There's no design that will make games better until the players get better and start to care.

Rival Wings is 2 teams and look how it goes. It's either you stomp or you get stomped, you very rarely get anything in between, at least on NA. Casual CC is the same, 2 teams and 95% of games are steamrolled by one side. Ranked Crystal Conflict can be close more often because the players are supposed to all have higher skills.

The solution is not to increase or decrease the number of teams/players, it's to make the players better (or keep the bad ones away).

Thats not the case for rival wings, I have 55% winrate on it and we have atleast turned around a match 70 times in 180 matches where we were outclassed