When will they make changes for 3v3?

The 3.0 patch updates heroes both in 3v3 and 5v5.
Now baron and gwen cp are weaklings, how can they make compensation of this?

Simply put its impossible to balance the heros for both 3v3 and 5v5. I hope you get the point.

Never. The game is now balanced around 5v5. Dual balance would take up too much memory and resources to be practical. It’s not impossible to do it’s just not the best allocation of physical and digital resources.

It’s literally just a bunch of numbers attached to an object. Memory is definitely not the issue. TIME (and effort) to balance every hero for each mode is the real explanation.


But it is so unfair.
It is just one month until next season. How can we rush to the rank we desire?

Play broken heroes in 3v3 would be my guess.

Everything thing is going to revolve around 5v5 now though. Everyone has to start from square one there.

1 Like

Yah, I really think this is true, sad as it is, because 3v3 could still be great. However, SEMC’s limited resources are being wholly directed at 5v5, because it’s the make-or-break for the game (and the company, since there’s nothing but the game).

1 Like

Rank? That would imply playing 3v3 which has worse matchmaking than 5v5…

I get t4 allies in 5v5 but can still carry the game.

I get my own vst allies in 3v3 but the game mode is stuid as hell…

I agree. It’s like your life 100% depends on carry. If they suck, you lose.

1 Like

Rank doesn’t even matter now. I only play 5v5 exclusively now.

1 Like

5 v5 can be dull though. Because it lacks rank it’s usually a snowball for one side or the other, not really enjoying that.

The snowball issue doesn’t have anything to do with 5v5 lacking a ranked mode. As we’ve all suspected, the matchmaker was broken and has allegedly been hotfixed this morning:


Matchmakers a joke, I’m playing vs tiers 1-6, and it some instances I’ve had to double check to be sure they’re not BOTs that’s how bad it / they are. If your used to higher skill tier players you’ll find 5v5 a little dull IMO.

1 Like

Yeah balancing stats for 3v3 is literally just adding a few new variables. Memory is NOT problem whatsoever cause stats should not take much space at all

They’re not going to. They’ll never directly validate the following statement, but SEMC effectively sold out 3v3 for 5v5 because that’s where they believe the revenue stream is going to source from. The entire 5v5 project was to attract a fresh and bulky batch of players to keep the game alive and competitive with big name titles like AoV and, to an extent, Mobile Legends. The creation of 5v5 was not some pure act of passion on SEMC’s part. It was a calculated business initiative.

Why else would they go from saying “5v5 will never happen!” to “hello wallets, we shall release 5v5 within the next few months!” within the same year.

Dual-balancing is entirely possible. Vainglory is not some monster game where a beefy piece of silicon processing power is a nonnegotiable prerequisite to run it optimally nor is a ton of storage space needed to host it. Quality SD cards at economical prices are a thing and the baseline standard for internal phone storage is at least 16 GB at this point. What’s the excuse? SEMC doesn’t have enough “resources” to properly balance 3v3?

If they have time to balance talents alongside 5v5, then why not 3v3?

Oh right, talents = $$$.

Ya’ll really thought this crew was going to revolutionize mobile gaming with a golden product worthy of contending with eminent PC and console titles with a layer of consumer-friendly business practices on top for that extra special flavor?



While I think your analysis is pretty much spot on, you are really salty as fuck. Try and get that cynicism out of your system - it’s bad for you.

They offer a free to play platform, it’s perfectly viable not to spend a penny on their product. They’re not Blizzard they don’t have endless amount of cash or programmers to make changes, they’re a relatively small gaming company.

Honestly people today want everything for nothing. When I was a kid concepts like free to play simply didn’t exist, be grateful you can ply for nothing.

1 Like

It’s also perfectly viable to criticize a shitty product, regardless of the price-tag attached.

And don’t even try to spin it as if the F2P-plague was a consumer-friendly thing. Most people would be better off just shelling out 20 bucks for a complete product, rather than making repeat purchases over time that they eventually lose track of, while being inconvenienced on purpose to force their hand on the “buy”-button.

SEMC are not at the worst end of that spectrum (yet), but their product is decidedly worse than it could be without badly conceptualized monetization attempts. So trying to shut up dissatisfied people with cries of “bUt 1t r fr3e!!” isn’t helpful.


Yeah yeah, how much have you spent on the game?

You’ll never satisfy all your consumers, some will leave others will join, they’ve gambled on 5v5 driving up interest and revenue, anecdotally I hear they don’t have revenue streams of rivals so it’ll be no great surprise to hear they can balance the number of modes they offer.

You just sound salty and whiny complaining that a small gaming company aren’t competing with the PC master race. If companies like supercell don’t bother qhy would SEMC?

1 Like