We all have our own opinions on what things really distinguish 3v3 and solo shuffle from one another, things that typically include skill-level requirements, accessibility, voice comms/coordination requirements, ladder integrity, how fast dampening ramps up, etc., but I’ve been noticing an increasing number of 3v3 mains that are of the mindset and/or more or less preaching that the equivalent of 3v3 = chess, while solo shuffle = checkers (or even worse, that 3s players are superior beings of sorts as compared to shuffle players).
Considering the undeniable and significant overlap in skillsets required to succeed in either bracket [e.g., just look at how many of the top 3s players are also the top shuffle players], I find this mindset to be quite hilarious, and really disingenuous.
The best analogy imo is a very simple one.
3v3 = rapid chess
Solo shuffle = blitz chess
It really doesn’t get any simpler than that.
Similar but different skillsets are required to succeed in both, one requires more time and thus more thought/action per round, whereas one is often more chaotic due to the increased time pressure.
I imagine that chess mains have their own squabbles as to what is the “premier” or “most skillful” bracket, but similar to the squabbles concerning 3v3 and shuffle, the FACT is that neither bracket is inherently better than the other.
Each bracket/game mode has aspects that make it more appealing than the other for a given audience.
It is what it is, but one thing is for certain, which is that as a community, we need to stop further dividing ourselves into cliques and then proceeding to insult one another because we don’t prefer the same iteration of the game.