Highguard’s 3v3 format punishes new players and struggles on big maps, reviewer says

Highguard is out now, and after roughly six hours of play a Kotaku writer says the new free-to-play FPS’s 3v3 format is a problem. Matches put two teams of three through a setup phase where they build defenses, then send players into large maps to loot and race to a large sword that lets one team break into the other’s base.

That leads to a raid, with attackers trying to blow up key locations with limited respawns—an experience the writer compares to Counter-Strike—and matches can hinge on a single big play. The writer argues that small lobbies increase pressure because there’s nowhere for players to “blame” others.

They point to games like Battlefield 6 and Call of Duty, which typically have larger player counts and give less-skilled players room to avoid feeling solely responsible for a loss. In one match a randomly matched teammate who was still learning failed in key fights and drew harsh criticism on voice chat, raising doubts about whether that player would return.

The writer also says 3v3 feels too sparse for Highguard’s massive maps: splitting off can quickly lead to running into multiple enemies with little chance of help, whereas 4v4 or 5v5 could leave room for partners, more varied base defense, and easier play with no-mic randos.

highguard, highguard 3v3 format, highguard review, wildlight highguard, 3v3 playercount issues, massive maps problem, large maps highguard, base defense mechanics, limited respawns, raid gameplay comparison, counter-strike comparison, small lobbies pressure, no-mic randos, voice chat criticism, matchmaking randoms, loot and sword objective, race to the sword, tactical teamwork focus, 4v4 5v5 suggestion, casual mode playercount, battlefield 6 comparison, call of duty comparison, kotaku writer review, game awards trailer