No1 is playing 3v3 on this server and that's a shame. If the 339 weapons were 3v3 rating required a lot of people would start playing 3s.
Printable View
No1 is playing 3v3 on this server and that's a shame. If the 339 weapons were 3v3 rating required a lot of people would start playing 3s.
Nah, only the people who think they can get the required rating would play 3s which means not enough teams to get to that rating and no one would have the weapons. There wouldn't be any mediocre/low teams to feed rating.
That wouldn't help at all
^ thisQuote:
Originally Posted by xogen
d
Perhaps if the required 3s rating would be lower than the 2s then? would be nice to get 3s running in some way.
1850 3v3 sounds fair enough
If I had 1 wish,
I would ask for a big enough *** for the whole world to kiss
Agree on this
well, it was like this on retail...
Only teams playing atm are russian wintraders from guild horde guild Kung Fu Panda. THey play vs each other and nobody of the officials give a ****
really hope 3vs3 can become a thing somehow, so this is my type speak to support that. 2's teams is just getting old, the combos are too black and white.
3's is where some interesting new strategies start to come to play, and a few unique ones.