Dear GGG here is the best argument I can put forth. Please read. PvP, Guilds = 3v3.

Dear Path of Exile 2 Development Team,
I’ll be blunt because this matters: PvP (player-versus-player) is not merely “another mode” — when done well it becomes a multiplier for longevity, engagement, discoverability, monetization, competitive prestige, community health, and content cadence. If PoE2 ships without a compelling, well-supported PvP ecosystem, you lose a class of players and a set of benefits that are extremely hard to recreate later. Below I explain why PvP matters in every practical, factorable way I can conceive, show why the absence of PvP isn’t automatically fatal (some great games survive without it), and give pragmatic, low-risk ways to implement PvP that protect PoE2’s core ARPG experience.

Quick reality check: yes — many very popular games have no PvP, but that’s not the same as “PvP is unnecessary”
Examples of hugely popular, mainly PvE-first titles: The Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim, Stardew Valley, The Witcher 3, Hades, and Baldur’s Gate 3. These games demonstrate that excellent single-player / co-op PvE can sustain huge audiences.
Crucial distinction: those games target different design goals and player psychology. Path of Exile’s DNA — deep build variety, high skill ceilings, item economies, ladder/seasonal culture — is the type of game that benefits disproportionally from a competitive, social layer. PvP is not about replacing PvE: it leverages existing systems to create emergent, long-tail value.

Direct, factorable benefits of adding PvP to PoE2
1) Player retention and session length


PvP gives players additional goals after they’ve exhausted PvE content — ladder climbs, ranked seasons, duo/party matches, leaderboards.


Matches create short, repeatable sessions (ideal for daily retention). Players come back to climb the ladder or chase a rank.


2) Increased monetization without power creep


Cosmetic sales (skins, HUDs, emotes), seasonal battle passes tied to ranked rewards, and event-only cosmetics for tournament winners.


Monetization focuses on vanity and UI/e-sports features, not on pay-to-win — preserves balance and community trust.


3) Competitive scene & marketing value


Esports tournaments, influencer matches, and official championships create free marketing spikes and long-term brand prestige.


Spectator-friendly games boost viewership on streaming platforms — viewers convert to players and buyers.


4) Higher skill ceiling and replayability


PvP valorizes niche builds, creative micro-play, and counterbuilding. It keeps meta evolution constant as players react to each other.


Builds that are “unfun” in PvE can shine in PvP and vice versa; this expands the utility of your content library.


5) Community growth & social cohesion


Guild rivalries, coaching economies, user-generated tournaments, and community content (guides, highlight reels) form stronger social glue than PvE alone.


Social bonds formed through PvP drive word-of-mouth and retention.


6) Balance feedback & testing ground


PvP exposes balance issues and edge-case interactions far more quickly than PvE; it becomes an immediate stress-test for skills/items.


A separate PvP sandbox can be used to prototype PvE balance shifts and vice-versa.


7) Economy stimulation


PvP demand for certain builds or cosmetic items can create new permanent sinks and trade activity in the economy, keeping markets lively.


8) Events and seasonal cadence


Ranked seasons, tournaments, and themed PvP events give you regular content reasons for patches, patch notes, and marketing pushes — sustaining a steady content rhythm.


9) Discovery and player acquisition


Highlight reels, short competitive clips, and dramatic PvP moments tend to go viral, drawing new players who otherwise wouldn’t try PoE2.



Practical objections and mitigations (so you get benefits without the headaches)
Concern: “PvP breaks our balance and confuses PvE players.”
Mitigations:


Make PvP opt-in. Separate matchmaking and dedicated PvP servers or modes.


Two parallel balancing tracks: (A) strict PvE balance, (B) PvP balance with explicit tooltips and separate tuning lists.


Seasonally rotate PvP-legal skill/item sets to keep design manageable and experimental balance safe.


Concern: “Toxicity & cheating.”
Mitigations:


Robust reporting, trusted-spectator systems, match replay logs, and firm penalties.


Ranked queues, verified accounts for ranked play, anti-cheat integration.


Incentivize positive behavior with tokens/badges for sportsmanship.


Concern: “Cost of development vs. ROI.”
Mitigations:


Phased rollout: start with a small, polished arena (1v1, 2v2, or 3v3), ranked ladder, and spectator mode. Iterate based on metrics.


Use existing systems where possible (skills, itemization) rather than inventing new mechanics.


Monetize through cosmetics, passes, and event tickets — low ongoing server cost, high long-term ROI.



Concrete proposal (minimal-risk, high upside roadmap)
Phase 0 — Design & prototype (2–3 sprints)


Define clear PvP goals (casual ladder vs. hardcore e-sports vs. both).


Create 1–2 pilot maps (arena + small objective map), 1v1 and 3v3 templates.


Decide legal skill/item list for PvP or implement relative scaling (see Phase 1).


Phase 1 — Opt-in Ranked Beta


Launch ranked 1v1 and 3v3 modes in a beta state.


Implement matchmaking by rating, quick-scrimmage casual queue, and spectator mode.


Add basic leaderboards and seasonal rewards (cosmetics, titles).


Collect metrics: match duration, churn, entry conversion, viewer numbers on streams.


Phase 2 — Expand & polish


Add tournaments, in-client tournament brackets, and automated reporting and replay systems.


Provide spectator overlays, caster tools (team comps, timers), and API hooks for streaming platforms.


Tune monetization around battle passes and event cosmetics.


Phase 3 — Esports & community


Official championship circuit, qualifiers built into ranked seasons.


Encourage third-party tournaments with server support and prize pools.


Long-term: support LAN-ready modes, caster SDK, and production-ready spectator clients.



Implementation details that matter (UX & product decisions)


Match length: aim for 5–15 minute matches for best retention and spectator friendliness.


Matchmaking: ELO/TrueSkill with role/experience weighting to avoid stomps.


Spectator tools: in-game free camera, player UIs, build readouts, live stat overlays.


Replay & analysis: save top matches to server; allow sharing/clips for creators.


Separate gear pools vs. full items: either restrict certain OP uniques or implement normalized stat scaling for PvP to avoid pay-to-win debates.


Leaderboards & rewards: season rank cosmetics, exclusive titles, and small account-bound rewards that don’t affect PvE power.



Measurable KPIs to validate PvP success


Daily active users (DAU) lift post-PvP launch.


Retention delta for players who try PvP vs those who don’t.


Conversion rate of viewers to players during events/tournaments.


Cosmetic take rate from PvP players vs. PvE-only players.


Average match duration and matches per session.


Net Promoter Score (NPS) change among competitive players.



Final pitch — why PoE2 should care now
You’ve built a game with deep build systems, meaningful itemization, and a community that loves optimization. Those ingredients are exactly what makes great PvP exciting. A small, expertly executed PvP ecosystem turns skills, items, and creativity into spectator drama, market activity, and seasonal stories — all huge multipliers for a live game. The safer choice is not to avoid PvP forever; it’s to introduce it carefully, measure fast, and let the community and meta refine it into something that amplifies PoE2 rather than detracts from it.
If you want, I can sketch a one-page competitive ruleset for a 3v3 ranked format (legal skills, banned items, matchmaking rules, reward tiers) and a simple list of metrics to collect during the first month of beta. I’ve kept this focused and practical so the team can act on it without risking core PvE integrity.
You have a world-class foundation. PvP — done thoughtfully — will multiply everything you’ve already built.

As an example, you could make the ranked 3v3 format guild based only. So you have to que up with members of your guild to compete against other guilds. This prevents the need for “random single que” in multiplayer which in my opinion reduces the 3v3 format and helps solidify the purpose of a guild.

One of the most common questions your players have right now in poe2 is what is the purpose of a guild? Right now I need 40 more slots for maxed guild. That will cost me money, I also want there to be a deeper purpose to that money spent than adding 40 more players. I think you’d see a rise in people buying guild slots and making guilds. Which in itself is more money.

It’s not predatory, it gives players more return on investment, and creates a deeper level of playing the game for every player that wants to engage.

All I see is win, win, win, win, win, win, win, I don’t even know how many wins there are in this post but it’s a lot.

Here’s an example of a reward for guild 3v3 at end of seasons.

Add a system that shows a guild name above the player name. At end of season PvP top 10 get a different color to make their guild name for the season based on how they placed. Reset at end of each season. If a guild gets a specific rank or better 3x seasons out of 6 seasons they permanently unlock the color of the lowest rank of 3x.

I think I’ve illustrated the idea. Simple yet sophisticated.

P.S. if you are worried about imbalance for guilds focused on PvP you could set it so each guild has an assigned roll like the officer and member roll, but instead title it combatant or Siege Competitor. Allow for 6-9 members to have this roll. 6 allows each guild 2 parties of 3 to trio play with, i feel 9 is better but still unsure myself. I feel like if you go above 12 it’s just a circus, and even 12 would be a circus in my opinion. 6 is good for the reasoning of a good amount of guilds can find 3 dedicated PvP players, some would find 6, but few would have 9 fully dedicated PvP members due to how many can be in one guild and that is why I honestly am still unsure 9 is wise at all. But you could do like 7 or 8 that way there are alternates for when people are offline/fill ins.

For some reason after typing this I feel 6-7 is the correct answer. You have to also include a way for the guild leader to flag themselves for the PvP team.

Anyway, Jonathan is correct, anyone can cook. I am a walking example of that mantra.

P.S.S you should incorporate Standard ranked PvP for guilds as well and possibly create guild ranks specifically for standard PvP specifically. Instead of combatant, legacy combatant, or instead of Siege Competitor, legacy siege competitor.

no, thank you. Ok, fine, add PvP but only after all PvE is perfectly balanced and game has at least 4 months worth of content for every new league. Then we can add PvP.

"

EVGENIUS#2976 wrote:

no, thank you. Ok, fine, add PvP but only after all PvE is perfectly balanced and game has at least 4 months worth of content for every new league. Then we can add PvP.

This....

PoE in my opinion does not need PvP. Just give us enough endgame content. More bosses, more activities, farming strategies.

"

fil0sofen#7545 wrote:

PoE in my opinion does not need PvP. Just give us enough endgame content. More bosses, more activities, farming strategies.

You realize PvP is defined as end game content yeah?

Lol. If GGG expects Poe2 to actually net them any player base over time and expects Poe1 PvP to be the “peak of path of exile player vs player”

I have really bad news for their future.

This isn’t a case of opinion. It’s a case of design philosophy which at the highest level is a derivative of HUMAN PSYCHOLOGY. No opinion required.

"

Lore#3772 wrote:

I have really bad news for their future.

Comments like this are tells that you know nothing about the business of gaming. GGG built one of the most stable studios in the industry with their crappy PvP.

Talk about what you know, not what you don't.

"

Lore#3772 wrote:

Concrete proposal (minimal-risk, high upside roadmap)
Phase 0 — Design & prototype (2–3 sprints)

Get out with AI slop.

That said, pvp in a hack & slash is doomed.
The fun of an H&S is to break the game, pvp balance is unachieveable by design. Look at diablo pvp : did it went as planned ? Can you cite at least one H&S game with a decent pvp variant ?

PvP in ARPGs and looter-shooters is a very unpopular format, mostly used for marketing purposes really than anything else.

D4's PvP zones are mostly empty, it's prolly less than 1% of playerbase that plays PvP for more than checking it out once or twice.

In Warframe, even with over one hundred thousand daily players, half of the time you wont find a match at all.

Doesn't seem worth it to me.

Furthermore, with so few players, balancing the game mode is nigh impossible. You can't use the same balance for PvP and PvE. That has never worked in ARPGs nor MMOs. GW2, ESO, WoW, Warframe, D4, D3, ... all have different adjustments for PvE and PvP and that takes a lot of effort.

Also, I am willing to bet that the feasibility time-wise is just not good at all. PoE1 and 2 have been specifically designed as PvE games and there's a whole myriad of technical points about making PvP fit a PvE game, from latency issues to various pieces of code that always assume that something can't impact players to so on. I'd be surprised if functional PvP that includes majority of the skills and existing mechanisms with acceptable latencies and a solid way of doing latency prediction and timing corrections was doable in less than a year at all. Or without a team of half a dozen developers and couple of designers already familiar with PoE2 internals. The return of investment for that sounds extremely low to me.

"

EVGENIUS#2976 wrote:

no, thank you. Ok, fine, add PvP but only after all PvE is perfectly balanced and game has at least 4 months worth of content for every new league. Then we can add PvP.

Perfect PvE balance will never exist and it has never existed in any game except the simplest ones. Balance in complex games is simply something you work towards asymptotically, meaning that you can get closer to it, but never quite reach it.

There also probably wont be 4 months of new content every league. GGG has explicitly stated that it is OK in their design and vision for majority of PoE players to play the game a month or two when a new league drops, and then go play something else. In my opinion, that's fine. Why does a game need to have new content for every week of the year?

I think there is only one acceptable form of PvP in this game and I rather like PvP.
Otherwise, stay away from it.
Don't entertain it.
Avoid it like the plague.
Stay as far away from this disaster as possible.

It would turn into something much larger than it needed to be due to people's unacceptance that someone might have better gear, better pathing, or skills, etc.

A class this or next league may be superior in an aspect that can win or lose a fight.
There are way too many variables for it to work independently.

So when the above happens, here comes the nerf hammer and the balancing act starts between PvE and PvP and ultimately both become broken.
And in almost all cases this happens, classes tend to become more and more similar to compensate for the inevitable lack of balance.

No, only one form of PvP I think could work in this.
Let us be the exiles on maps.
*Has to be on a waystone.
*No Xp loss for either.
*One at a time and completely optional.
*Mobs can attack both people.
*If someone gets invaded and they aren't feeling it that day, give them a way out.
*Don't leave an option in that would ruin someone's day.

Think Elden ring invasions but just one at a time and it's completely opt in or out.
The only perk is you get a single copy drop if you win. Nobody loses anything but a sting to the ego.
Thats it.

This is the ONLY way PvP would work in this game.

And, AND after several edits:
You don't have to balance or change a single thing around this idea other than the access programming. No balance changes needed AT ALL.

PvP is terrible in this game. Gets almost no engagement in PoE1 because it's an impossible nightmare to balance. I hope they never add PvP to PoE2. Pretty sure they've even described adding pvp to PoE1 as "misguided".