Team Sequential (Freestyle-Sequential for Team Games)

AK_iceman · Post by **AK_iceman** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 2:00 am

thats what freestyle is

philbert · Post by **philbert** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 10:59 am

I like the old rules better where you play in order, one team to the next. There are certain strategies that don't work any more with the new rules. Could it at least be an option to play by the old rules?

alster · Post by **alster** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:01 am

philbert wrote:I like the old rules better where you play in order, one team to the next. There are certain strategies that don't work any more with the new rules. Could it at least be an option to play by the old rules?

I agree. The programming must be there somewhere. Why not bring it back and keep it as an option?

Bring It On · Post by **Bring It On** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:04 am

Could it at least be an option to play by the old rules

i think that would be a great idea and would please every1.

HighBorn · Post by **HighBorn** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:04 am

and i also think that every game started this way should be finished this way... changeing tactics in the middle of a game is bs...

bretzsky · Post by **bretzsky** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:10 am

i totally agree with you all, i would have only liked to see the staggered turn in the first round, and couldn't they just do it one player from one team and then the same position player from the other team and so on down the sequential list because this random madness makes the fun of team games go out the window. I don't really care to play any team games anymore, because it is no longer a team game, but an individual game playing with team members. The whole fun and excitement of team play is sharing troops but you can no longer do this as you don't know who is going to go next.

My vote is for first round staggered turns and then sequential; this would allow a fair start as each team would be able to prepare and it would be a complete gamble to fort all your men into another teammate not knowing if you or the other team were next.

Changing rules midway through has also cost me. I played based on the old style and would have played a lot differently if I had known the new rules.

2dimes · Post by **2dimes** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:40 am

alstergren wrote:
philbert wrote:I like the old rules better where you play in order, one team to the next. There are certain strategies that don't work any more with the new rules. Could it at least be an option to play by the old rules?
I agree. The programming must be there somewhere. Why not bring it back and keep it as an option?

Even I agree and think it should have stayed on as an option. (the new way added as an Option.)

Maybe you can look into it after dealing with getting the upgrades stable.

Marvaddin · Post by **Marvaddin** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 11:54 am

What can I say? I voted for the 2nd.

steel24 · Post by **steel24** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 12:22 pm

If you`re so hellbent on this new change, then make this the third option for games. 1). Sequential 2). freestyle and 3). Staggered Sequential
I probably just lost a game because of this new rule (which I was completely oblivious to), which I had a 90% chance to win.

HighBorn · Post by **HighBorn** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 12:26 pm

well its cost me 3 so far today and im sure more tomarrow.. these are not the games i started and have basically been mislead to a game i didnt want.. MEH!!

areyouincahoots · Post by **areyouincahoots** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 12:54 pm

steel24 wrote:make this the third option for games. 1). Sequential 2). freestyle and 3). Staggered Sequential

This would be my preference...

Telvannia · Post by **Telvannia** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 1:01 pm

steel24 wrote:If you`re so hellbent on this new change, then make this the third option for games. 1). Sequential 2). freestyle and 3). Staggered Sequential.

i agree with this make a new type

HighBorn · Post by **HighBorn** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 1:02 pm

actualy it would probally be single double (double with staggred) triple (triple with staggard)

philbert · Post by **philbert** » Mon Jul 10, 2006 2:22 pm

Now that I've played the new rules, I like them. I would still prefer it as an option because I would like to be able to play by the old sequential rules.

2dimes · Post by **2dimes** » Sun Jul 16, 2006 11:45 pm

Marvaddin · Post by **Marvaddin** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 12:20 am

Where are the old rules as an option?

wcaclimbing · Post by **wcaclimbing** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:13 pm

why isnt there a choice for " i dont like the old rules?

qeee1 · Post by **qeee1** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:26 pm

I'm sensing this poll is slightly biased... but I can't figure out why...

Pedronicus · Post by **Pedronicus** » Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:05 pm

lol John

strike wolf · Post by **strike wolf** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:45 pm

I hate the new sequential rules. How am I supposed to strategize with my partner? huh?

AndyDufresne · Post by **AndyDufresne** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:49 pm

Adapt? Human beings are usually pretty good at that. When they are faced with a problem or something similar, they will find a way to work it out or around it. I suggest trying a few things, until you find something that works.

And there's always standard games available.

--Andy

strike wolf · Post by **strike wolf** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 6:54 pm

I play plenty of standard games, the problem with these new sequential rules is that it makes it harder to coordinate attacks.

AndyDufresne · Post by **AndyDufresne** » Mon Jul 24, 2006 7:09 pm

Wait, you mean everyone has to use even more strategy? Sheesh... Harder, perhaps. Impossible, no.

--Andy

ZeoEmpire · Post by **ZeoEmpire** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 11:48 am

Freestyle Sequential Team Turns

Sequential by teams but Freestyle by Team Players.

fighter1405 · Post by **fighter1405** » Tue Sep 05, 2006 12:51 pm

That could work

Team Sequential (Freestyle-Sequential for Team Games)

Old Rules Sequential Team Games

Re: Old Rules Sequential Team Games

Re: Old Rules Sequential Team Games

Freestyle Sequential teams turn