Team/trust idea

[Captain Dak]

Sounds like bull to me, I highly doubt your able to win that many battles solo without some sort of aim bot or damage hack, if it were 50/50 that would be more believable, and give a person a chance, dude read my posts -_- this is happening already with or with out the suggestion, you seem to reject an idea that would potentially make it harder for loners like you, deal with it. Fighting on your own should be difficult

I strongly suggest you watch some pvp strategy videos or something, because it is 100% possible to win that many games solo. At the point I'm at, I actually do better when I'm playing solo because I have more reason to pvp well and also I don't have to share any of my loot or anything. Going solo rather than teaming will help you in the long run. Don't think you have to team to win because that is totally false.

 

[EvermoreHD]

You're the only one on this thread supporting YOUR OWN idea...

 

[RC_4777]

Yeah, pretty much what everyone else said.

This is the Minecraft Hunger Games Son. They didn't have any fancy plugins and deathmatches, and bacca's.

I liked for the thing about baccas.

 

[king_tnerb]

No one wins without being in a team anyway..... I've never once won a game without teaming, why do you gun down a half decent idea, I'm only building upon what the community have already created.

Completely wrong. 100% of my wins are from going solo.

 

[cadbane4321]

No one wins without being in a team anyway..... I've never once won a game without teaming, why do you gun down a half decent idea, I'm only building upon what the community have already created.

I have 100+ solo victories. You don't have to team to win the survival games

 

[Kraken]

I think this idea has some potential. I personally like the idea of /view. It gives insentives NOT to betray and if someone refuses to create the pact, you know they have malicious intentions. However given the state of MCSGv2, I think this won't be added any time soon. I suggest you bring this up again at a later date and it may just be added in =D

 

[TheInforcerHD]

Creative but I wouldn't think it would be put in. Teaming is very common and is easier to win by teaming so the cost of teaming should be a trust issue between the two. I think there would be too many teams then there already are if this did happen. But good interesting idea.

 

[jruzzin]

Dislike.

 

[BlitzCometITU]

Winning solo is easier then winning with a team, when your moron friends go out to fight and lose you have to help them and you waist time and the other people get more time, just a bad situation. Now in a solo scenario, you run over mid-fight, kill them both, bam full armor good sword.

 

[darkai202]

But then you can't backstab...

I don't want to be spammed in the lobby with [Noob wants to team with you, accept?]

And betraying someone is stupid if they're going to get a message saying they'll be betrayed before it happens.

Anyway, wtf is this about not being able to win without teaming. Teams are easy to take out, let's face it. Noobs have to train to become good, that isn't going to happen if they have a friendly happy time. They need to have it rough to get better.

 

[ShaunDepro]

Not to mention that in the real hunger games its clear to see that the teamed players were succeeding

But the teamed players within the actual hunger games could freely betray without notifying they were betraying them and half the damage. Neat logic.

 

[Sir Royal]

No one wins without being in a team anyway..... I've never once won a game without teaming, why do you gun down a half decent idea, I'm only building upon what the community have already created.

23 wins.

2 of them teamed