For the experienced PvP player it is not new that with holding a Zone Advantage you can force enemy spawns in a bad zone position by leaving them control over said Zone. A good example is the Map Dead Cliffs, where you can trap the enemy team spawn-wise in the Locker-Room. The problem with Control is, that a Zone Advantage is very hard to break when: A. Your team is not organized/incompetent in their teamplay B. The Opponents play organized C. The Opponents keep you locked in a bad position with your team spawns (example, Dead Cliffs Locker-Room) All of those situations happen on a regular basis every day in PvP. The community has shown since 3 years now that they can't really adapt to a playstyle that communication/organisation-driven outside of a fireteam. Hence why Fireteams usually "stomp" their opponents into the ground, unless they face equal might of fireteams. Maybe it is time to rework that spawn-flip rule and add another catch-up mechanic into control. What about making zone advantage more of a risk for players? A quick idea... What if one team has for too long zone advantage, the other team with no zone advantage at that time can capture zones faster than in regular? This would allow the team behind the lead to be more of a competition to the opponents, which have to fight more consistent. Which then again leads to more consistent play in the mode itself. I personally don't think it is a good experience in general, when one team vastly outmatches an other team in performance. On one side it makes the winners feel like very good and the defeated feel horrible. And that leads to frustration. Frustration leads to more players not playing PvP or not enjoying it. And that is not the goal for both players and the developers of a game. We have features like the Mercy-Rule, that is a good idea on paper but kicks in a bit too late usually to prevent reaching the "frustration peak" (no felwinter peak pun intended here). And players will be frustrated when they feel like fighting a battle without standing a chance. So perhaps a rule change for control is a good idea to start with.