Although I prefer Control to Clash this is a very well thought out post that's definitely right about the differences between the two and each modes strengths and weaknesses. I don't think Clash should necessarily replace Control outright and I also think some of the downsides to Control that you list are actually strengths of the mode for the people that like it. One of the problems the mode does present is that much of the balancing and stuff like that attempts to tamp down on what some people consider strengths but others consider weakness. I wouldn't consider the way movement works in Control (when its uniform among players) to be a downside although I would consider it a reason for Clash to be available at the same time or more often. You just have to plan ahead for the way it works. It definitely requires a different approach than the in your face boxer playstyle that you would find more often in Clash or Rumble. But neither approach is better or worse than the other. With the sitting ducks thing, its one of the reasons why uniform movement and shot registration is so important in that mode. Even if you're not trying to score 40 kills you really need to be able to kill exactly who you're trying to kill if you should be killing them because things can go off the rails pretty quick. Its going to sound toxic, but snowballing is part of control and when people are playing the mode to win creating the opportunity for that is going to be part of Control. Its the process that leads to that that's interesting and its never not going to be about that unless the game matchmakes in such a way that tries to remove that aspect which leads to other issues. Its not something that should be happening every match but the zones and controlling them should be expected to lead to that at times. That's something that can happen if you put 12 of the world's best players in the lobby. I definitely like Clash and wouldn't really mind if it replaced Control but that mode has its own issues as well. I'm not going to list them off but there's things that can happen in Clash that get somewhat mitigated in Control by having a focus on zones. The absolute biggest argument for Clash that you put imo is the weapon diversity. There's just going to be more weapon diversity for more players in Clash and you can switch things up and try things out without that almost guaranteeing a loss in a match that you may have won. Another reason Clash would be good is that in Control there is a pretty big strategic aspect that newer players may not be accustomed to and tbh the game really goes out its way to remove at times. So Clash would probably be easier to matchmake for in some ways. And it would definitely be easier for people to learn in that mode in a more straightforward way. Also, IB is still going to be Control (unless it isn't) so it wouldn't be that big of a deal if regular control took a backseat for a while. Clash would probably be better for new players, some of the things that help ensure victory in Control wind up getting balanced out, and pretty much every game has team deathmatch always available. This is getting too long so the tldr is I certainly wouldn't be against it even though I've always preferred control.