4v4

[Fat Tire]

Good or Bad? I think both.....

I firmly believe they want to get rid of 2v2 even tho it is the most accessible bracket. There has been talk about other types of brackets and I can only see 4v4. 5s is difficult logistically as it is so I dont see anything above 5v5. 4v4 might be hard to balance also but might be easier than 2s. 2 healer/2dps or 3dps/1healer are really your only comps and maybe 4dps as gimmick comp.

4s might end up being worse than 2s to balance overall but I really see them killing 2s in the near future. For me personally, 3s is my favorite so I am fine with no changes. Although, I wouldnt mind seeing 4v4 as I could just add a healer and go 3dps/1 healer. /shrug

[Dominian]

There is a discussion on arena junkies and a guy called Ogc explains why 4v4 would be a bad idea.

4v4 would be most similar to 2v2, as healer balance in 5s (normally 2 healer) is 40%, in 3s it's 33%, and in 2s it's 50%. Very few one healer teams would exist in a 4v4 environment seeing as two healers can already heal a 5v5 very well.

It would be the panultimate outlast bracket, where games would go to time more often than in 2v2. Cleave teams would also be more dominant in this bracket due to MS being so important (and with an MS class comes counter to offensive casters, so you might as well not even attempt to bring a warrior-warlock-healerx2 combo, for instance).

4v4 is a terrible idea. Sorry to crush everyone's dreams.

I dislike 2v2 but 4v4 would mean even longer games i guess.

[Fat Tire]

I have read that before.

That opinion is based on how arenas stand now.

There are GC posts just this past week about giving more classes MS. So ya currently it might be an issue but with some changes it will be no worse than 2s and I believe that they want to get out of the 2s market altogether.