[GO] Random Team Games

by **TheForgivenOne** on Wed Dec 09, 2009 2:43 am

I really like this idea. Could help out less experienced players get better tactics. I know when i first joined, all i saw was quads games with high ranks. But since i was new, i just joined. i almost got deterred from coming back after the first couple games. But this option could help out new players get into the game. Also helps out the lower rank players get new teammates.

by **Baron Von PWN** on Wed Dec 09, 2009 4:10 pm

I would also like to see this option.

by **shanksdigs** on Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:38 pm

As a game scenario this would be great. Neon Peon or something like that argued that this would ruin team games, but it wouldnt if players were still given the option to start games without random shuffle.

If the "Start a Game" section had a button where a player could choose either "random teammate shuffle" or "choose teammates" then this would be great and I would choose one or the other option frequently and I would jump into more games that listed random teammate shuffle as the scenario.

This is a good idea, looks like you have a bunch of ideas posted and don let detractors slow you down PLAYER57646783647389298.

by **shanksdigs** on Thu Dec 10, 2009 12:38 pm

Could you re-open the poll?

by **Queen_Herpes** on Thu Dec 10, 2009 1:54 pm

shanksdigs wrote:Could you re-open the poll?

I would also play this game option and am also hoping you can re-open the poll (in case the polls make a difference) otherwise, just chalk me up as another player who'd like to see this happen.

by **stahrgazer** on Fri Dec 11, 2009 1:26 pm

I probably wouldn't want to play it, but I wouldn't vote "no" for those who want it as an option, as long as gamefinder makes clear which team games are going to be randomized.

There is a work-around, however.

If you see a higher rank playing a map you enjoy, pm him and request to team with him on a game. Not all will agree, but many will, especially if the lower rank agrees to follow the strategy he determines. It's to their benefit for points... a higher rank and lower rank totalled together lessens the total team points, which means when it comes time to calculate points won, he'll win more or lose less than he would have if he teamed with an equal rank.

Another way to introduce yourself to a stranger is to join a 1v1 he may have set up, try to engage in fun gamechat, and at the end of the game request to team on doubles or be a third in a triples he may wish to set up.

by **Queen_Herpes** on Sun Dec 13, 2009 12:06 pm

PLAYER57832 wrote:Concise description:
OPTION: allow games where teammates are not set before game starts.

Specifics:

This would be an option. It would NOT replace current team play structure.

Teams would be "shuffled" after all the slots are filled, so you would not know in advance who your teammates might be.

They could either be straight random shuffled, without regard to rank/experience, etc.

OR a "even" rank order.
EDIT -- this "ranking" idea is rough... anyone with better ideas, speak up!
That is, in the second option one team might get the highest ranked player, the second would get the next highest and the third highest, then the first team would get the fourth and (if applicable) fifth ... the second team would get the 6th (and if 8-player) 7th and so forth.
Example: Major, Captain, Leuitenant, Sergeant, Sergeant, Private, Cook, Cook

Team 1 Major Team 2 Captain and luietenant

Team 1 Sergeant, Sergeant Team 2 Private, Cook

Team 1 Cook

Team 1: Major, Sergeant, Sergeant, Cook
Team 2: Captain, Lueitenant, Private, Cook

This will improve the following aspects of the site:
Not everyone has set teammates with whom to play. This means a lot of us avoid team games because we don't want to face 3 majors who obviously play together all the time. This would not prevent them from playing at all. But it would provide an extra option.

The biggest issue is rank. IF teams were random, then sometimes ranks would "one-sided". However, that would be no different than sometimes getting a really good drop, good dice, etc. Also, just because someone has a higher rank does not necessarily mean they are the expert at any particular map (often, but not always).

To get around this, they could be weighted, either as described above or some other fashion.

Adding this as a new game option on the "start a game" menu would make playing team games MUCH EASIER for new players. I think it would be something that the SoC would fully endorse and I'd like to see some SoC Teacher and Leader responses here. Certainly, random could mean that if 4 noobs signed in with 4 experienced players that the randomness could result in the noobs being teamed together and the experienced players being on the other team. However, I would think that the predominant form would see some kind of mixture, thereby forcing the experienced players to "teach" their nooby comrades how to play and what to do. Certainly, some noobs might go rogue. Certainly, some noobs could be multis, but due to the random nature of the option the rogue noobs, the noobs that won't listen, the multis could end up on either team. This could be a learning experience for new players, could be a great option for experienced players if they hapen to join a game with 100% experienced players, could offer experienced players opportunities to help out the inexperienced. The list goes on...

SoC? What do you think?

by **RatheVyrm** on Mon Dec 28, 2009 10:40 am

Oh, man, I've been wanting to have this option for a while, just came to finally suggest it, and found this thread.

I agree that it should be an option, and I really think it would encourage a lot more playing by a significant number of conquer club members, particularly new players. Heck, I'd probably play about five times more than I normally do, since I often don't have a regular, reliable partner to play with, and nearly all the games I search for seem to be the same teams of high-ranked players who are used to playing with each other (which is completely and totally fine, of course, but it'd be nice to have this option).

by **ch0rn** on Thu Jul 29, 2010 10:26 am

Suggestion:
Would there be a way to set it up so team games are more balanced. Seems every team game is an experienced team with 3-4 reserved slots versus a team with Noobs that has never played together before.

(Non tournament play obviously)

Possible solution ?
How about Needing a certain rank to join, then make random teams ? Or something to that effect. Team games rock but they are so often completely 1 sided.

by **Dako** on Fri Jul 30, 2010 3:28 pm

Moved to suggestions.

by **PLAYER57832** on Fri Jul 30, 2010 5:51 pm

ch0rn wrote:Suggestion:
Would there be a way to set it up so team games are more balanced. Seems every team game is an experienced team with 3-4 reserved slots versus a team with Noobs that has never played together before.

(Non tournament play obviously)

Possible solution ?
How about Needing a certain rank to join, then make random teams ? Or something to that effect. Team games rock but they are so often completely 1 sided.

I proposed something along these lines..

One was that people would join, but teams would only be formed randomly after everyone had joined. You could still wind up with all noobs playing all majors, but the likelihood is less. Anyway, the idea flopped.

The other idea was to stratify, then randomize. That is, the highest rank would go on one team, the next highest rank on the next...etc. Problem with that is it would be more or less easy to figure out who would be on what team, even to "tilt" things so you joined with those you want to play.

Setting a specific rank to join is always shot down as being anti- new people. I think it would be nice to have a limit for public games, but allow them to join private games.

Anyway, none of those ideas went over very well.

by **jefjef** on Fri Jul 30, 2010 7:00 pm

Well when I joined, as most others, I was a noob and without a pard. As you play you meet people and build teams. Why change it? I would never join a game that I would be randomly assigned partners.

A very good % of my public games are filled with good established teams anyway.

I'm going to go find an open team game now and bring a team with me.

by **MichelSableheart** on Sat Jul 31, 2010 4:14 am

For quite a few people, one of the attractions of team games is that they play together with people they know. That is not something you want to take away. If you want to avoid playing against established teams without having established teammates, pay attention to which games and which teams you join.

A way I have found to work if you want to play with random partners against an unestablished team, is to look for a game in which team 1 isn't completely filled yet (has open slots), then join team 2.

by **Queen_Herpes** on Sat Jul 31, 2010 9:59 am

This sounds like the random team suggestion, am I correct?

by **Woodruff** on Sat Jul 31, 2010 12:01 pm

Queen_Herpes wrote:This sounds like the random team suggestion, am I correct?

Sort of an offshoot of random team...or perhaps better stated as a modification of it.

by **TheForgivenOne** on Sat Jul 31, 2010 1:30 pm

MichelSableheart wrote:For quite a few people, one of the attractions of team games is that they play together with people they know. That is not something you want to take away. If you want to avoid playing against established teams without having established teammates, pay attention to which games and which teams you join.

Yes, while this is true, I know i would personally like to play a game where you don't know what the teams are. Sure, a lot of high ranks probably won't like this, but i bet a ton of low ranks would. It would give you the ability to realize, Hey, i really like these/this guy(s) (or girl), they/he/she plays well and communicate well, perhaps this person would like to play some normal team games with me.

It would give the ability for people to find new partners, which I am always up for.

by **ch0rn** on Tue Aug 03, 2010 10:23 am

Well, if it was an option you wouldn't HAVE to play the random team games if you don't want to. It would just be another way to setup the game for people who don't play on established teams. you could even go so far as to fog out the names of the players who have already joined the match, endless possibilities. The teams who play with an established team will still have a place to play, they just might not end up with so many "David vs Goliath" types of matches.

I am only speaking for myself of course, but I really enjoy team games, except so many times I join a team match and end up with 2-3 partners who have never been on a team together playing against a team who has countless matches together...

Thanks for elaborating on my original post guys. Glad some people like the idea.

by **greenoaks** on Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:17 am

i would like to see a random teams option implemented

we can now select random maps so why not random partners

by **TheForgivenOne** on Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:25 am

greenoaks wrote:i would like to see a random teams option implemented

we can now select random maps so why not random partners

Agreed.

It would just be an option, not forcing random partners upon people who join team games. That would destroy Tournies and Clans.

by **allyboo** on Mon Jan 17, 2011 5:49 am

I like this idea as an optional extra, not as a default setting you can't get out of.

It is nice to play in a team with someone you know, but additionally it would sometimes be quite fun to be assigned a random team

by **IcePack** on Mon Jan 17, 2011 12:59 pm

Sure interesting idea, not something i would play very often but as an option fine.

Put a poll up i would vote for it.

IcePack

by **Woodruff** on Mon Jan 17, 2011 1:49 pm

ch0rn wrote:The teams who play with an established team will still have a place to play, they just might not end up with so many "David vs Goliath" types of matches.

No, they'll still have all of those that they want, since they arrange those through PMs and invitations to the lowly ignorant masses anyway.

by **skychaser** on Fri Sep 02, 2011 11:32 am

When I want to join a team game. I JUST CAN'T find a decent game. Why? It's simple, the masters of the universe mega upper generals from hell are always the first to join and they Always form the better team and surprisingly joining the other team will leave-me with two cooks who know nothing about the game mechanism so it doesn't matter my plan or strategy, it's almost impossible winning any team game one joins.

My plan would be to make ANY public team game shuffle all the players in the moment the game start, so this way things will be a litle more balanced and team game will even be possible. The way things are now is as balanced as a match between a MMA champion against a random paraplegic.

This way only private games will be team games and it fits a little better.

by **MoB Deadly** on Fri Sep 02, 2011 1:37 pm

Haha this would be awesome! Would be even better if you could do some sort of "matchmaking" so that the game consists of all similar rank.

Of course still allow all team functionality to still exist

by **TheForgivenOne** on Fri Sep 02, 2011 2:52 pm

This has been suggested before, and it is sitting somewhere in the archives right now. I do like the suggestion, but not the "ALL PUBLIC" games must be shuffled. If you could have the option to shuffle up the ranks, going in order (Best player on Team 1, second best on Team 2, third best on team 2, etc), then I would fully support this.