Allow me to completely dismantle (or attempt to) all known reasons for why SSM is not a 1v1 mode. Get a rank/MPS: Not everybody has a rank, or the appropriate rank. Saying "well most of you have a rank" isn't a valid response either. This is the most low effort argument you can give, and for that I shall give a low effort response; no. Stat Boosting: Stat boosting is in every game to some degree and pinning ssm 1v1 down for being easy to stat boost is unfair. Every single game has stat boosting and there is next to no logical or sensible way of somehow managing it or disallowing it completely. It will always happen. The reason I compare it to other games is because Stat Boosting isn't a gameplay aspect, not to benefit my argument. Every game is different in terms of gameplay, however every has the same form of stat boosting. Get Good/Deal with it [Targeting/Teaming]: Let me propose a situation: Player X has 4 lives, and has been playing very well the entire game. Player Y and Z both have 2 lives, and decide to excessively target/team on Player X. This indirectly punishes player X for managing their lives well. I'm not saying FFA games are supposed to be fair, they never will be because of teaming or excessively targeting people who are good. This is specifically why we don't want SSM to be an FFA mode .Can FFA work in some games? Of course, yes. It can amplify the amount of strategy needed to perform well. There are even ways to minimize losing in an FFA game despite being unfair. However, it just simply isn't suited for SSM as it promotes a lame, frustrating type of playstyle that due to imbalance of the game, sometimes isn't possible to counter, and also the fact that SSM's mechanics just don't compliment fighting multiple people at once, nor does the game. What do I mean by lame gameplay? I think a strategy we've all seen used in play is a skeleton, snowman, zombie, etc shooting at 2 players fighting from afar. That isn't very engaging compared to the 1v1 scenario, where this wouldn't happen because both players would have their focus on each other with no outside aid or interaction. Another strategy most commonly seen from players with a lot of wins is getting excessively targeted by multiple people. In a game like Fortnite, there are multiple strategies you can pull to beat a 2v1. The game being made an FFA, literally made with you being 2v1'ed in mind, gives you the tools to beat a 2v1, you just have to be skilled. In SSM, everybody starts by themselves with 4 lives. In Fortnite duos/squads where you start with 2/4 people, and are meant to have a team, you are supposed to have communication to minimize the chances of someone dying in your team, and if that happens, minimizing the consequences. In SSM, you don't start with a team, you start by yourself. There is no communication or team work. It's just you unfairly getting 2v1'ed. But other games have targeting/teaming too! Why not make 1v1 modes for them!: This point essentially contradicts itself. By saying "why not make a 1v1 mode for those games", you're implying that a 1v1 simply wouldn't work for those other games. Survival Game/Cakewars 1v1 modes probably wouldn't work because they were meant to be FFA/TeamFFA, so by the way they were made, it benefits those genres. If you don't think a 1v1 mode would be bad for those games, then I don't see what's stopping you from doing what I am right now. SSM is different from SG/Cakewars, and should not be treated as if they were the same game. It works better in 1v1's, not worse. Yes, obviously all games with 3+ people/teams have targeting. We want to remove that. Splits up the community: I can understand the concern with splitting up the community. Even someone who would be in favor of 1v1 mode would. I can't exactly have a response for splitting up the community. We don't know what mode would be more popular, how many people would stay in FFA/Teams or switch over to the new 1v1, etc. Is "Splitting up the community" a good argument? No. But you can't exactly defend or argue for it because neither side knows what would happen if it were to be added. My prediction for if we added a 1v1 mode? Given my experience, I'd say teams would very quick;y die out, and maybe a small to decent chunk of players would switch over to 1v1, but most likely not all. In this scenario/prediction, I'd remove teams. It has the least amount of players anyway. However, we can't say for sure without adding it first.