[GO] Random Team Games

by **zip_disk** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 6:54 am

chapcrap wrote:Various threads have been started throughout the years that have to do with having a random team option. I have merged eleven such thread. The general consensus is that having an option to join a game and have the teams be randomized would be a great tool to create fair teams. More recently it has been advocated more because of the benefits it would create it achieving the new Teammate Medal.

At two different points, this was put on lackattack's 'To Do List' as something that he wanted to get done. However, it was never seen to completion.

One of the threads had a poll that has been erased. That poll had 19 in favor, 1 opposed, and 1 neutral. I have created a new poll for this merged thread.

show: Original Post by zip_disk

by **Phobia** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 7:00 am

i like the idea but when i play team games i often want to be with my team partner(s) because we know each other strategies and stuff

by **gavin_sidhu** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 7:27 am

sounds like a good option.

by **AK_iceman** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 4:42 pm

zip_disk wrote:Was looking through the ranks of unfilled double and triple team games and noticing the trend. Generally the unfilled spots are for whole teams that would face high ranking teams. I assume that's because people are afraid of playing against a good team and/or being stuck with an unknown ally who might deadbeat or just be a poor player.

That is exactly why. So if we make the teams random this is just more likely to happen. Might be good for an option, for people who like randomness. But I believe we have enough options as is, so I do not think this is a good idea.

by **Bishopking** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:34 pm

your so negative! always! some people make an effort to find friends and dont have alot of time on their hands to live on CC like some.

by **AK_iceman** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:40 pm

I apologize for being so negative in my post, i have edited it to show why i think it is a bad idea more clearly.

by **Bishopking** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:43 pm

well good on you...ty
wish I had that option too

by **zip_disk** on Sat Aug 05, 2006 6:26 pm

AK_iceman wrote:
zip_disk wrote:Was looking through the ranks of unfilled double and triple team games and noticing the trend. Generally the unfilled spots are for whole teams that would face high ranking teams. I assume that's because people are afraid of playing against a good team and/or being stuck with an unknown ally who might deadbeat or just be a poor player.

That is exactly why. So if we make the teams random this is just more likely to happen. Might be good for an option, for people who like randomness. But I believe we have enough options as is, so I do not think this is a good idea.

That would only be true for established teams who always play together, for the assorted people who usually end up against those teams or random pickup games its far from it. It would be normal for them. Everyone has an equal chance of getting stuck with a bad partner then so its theoretically more fair.

by **gulio** on Fri Jan 12, 2007 7:20 pm

Have a game type where the slots are filled up, and then as the game starts - the teams are randomly created from the members that joined.

by **Lone.prophet** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 4:59 am

i like this idea

by **RobinJ** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 5:28 am

So do I - might stop me from not joining games in which a noob could be my teammate. But it would have to be no more than an option

by **HotShot53** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:22 pm

I like it... would be good for those of us who have no regular team partner... that way we won't be at a huge disadvantage when playing against people who always play together.

by **AndyDufresne** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:41 pm

It seems like if this was implemented, more people would complain about getting stuck with a deadbeat team mate.

--Andy

by **lackattack** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:44 pm

I like it too. But I hate options.

I also have on my to-do list a reservation / invite feature. If teams are random by default, reservations could be used to force a team.

We should only launch both features together or else set teammates will go ballistic!

by **CBlake** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:44 pm

well thats their fault for joining the game isnt it?

by **lackattack** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 12:45 pm

Don't worry about deadbeats, by the time this is done deadbeats will no longer be a problem in team games.

by **silvanthalas** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 1:27 pm

lackattack wrote:But I hate options.

Options are the spice of world domination games!

by **spiesr** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 1:29 pm

silvanthalas wrote:
lackattack wrote:But I hate options.

Options are the spice of world domination games!

The spice that burns hsi eyes...

by **Marvaddin** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:05 pm

Random teams by default? I cant see any reason to it. Whats wrong with the way we are already playing? If I remember well, this was strongly rejected in a poll...

by **AK_iceman** on Sat Jan 13, 2007 2:16 pm

Marvaddin wrote:Random teams by default? I cant see any reason to it. Whats wrong with the way we are already playing? If I remember well, this was strongly rejected in a poll...

Being a strong team game player, I have to agree.

So, the way you are proposing it to be set-up is that by default, all team games will be random teammates after the game starts.
Then... as an option you can set reservations for EVERYONE in the game?

I don't like that because beyond my partners joining my team, I dont care who joins the opponents side. I dont want to be bothered to have to pm people and ask if they want to play a game so I can reserve them a spot.

If I am wrong, please correct me. But this is how I understand it right now.