• Our Minecraft servers are offline but we will keep this forum online for any community communication. Site permissions for posting could change at a later date but will remain online.

Teaming is unfair and anti-competitive.

Status
Not open for further replies.

jonnysurvives

Peacekeeper
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
1,375
Reaction score
1,801
I know what you're thinking. Real no-no, up there with grace period, but please hear me out.

MCSG has come a long way from beta, for good and for bad, and naturally the climate has changed. The serious players used to go solo, whereas the more inexperienced players would be more likely to team as they got a feel for the survival games. Blamph would always preach that solo was the way to go if y0u wanted to improve. However, nowadays MCSG is home to a host of tryhards with their gaming PCs and mechanical keyboards and a complete lack of empathy for other players. The skill level a player needs to win a decent portion of their games solo is unreasonably high- players that used to win 1/2 of their games now typically win 1/4 or less, and this is entirely due to the ubiquity of teams, and to a lesser extent hackers (but that's a separate issue).

If you think about it, teaming is grossly unfair. There used to be frequent threads on how to take out teams- the standard procedure being to use chokepoints, spam fire, split them up etc, but nowadays a team are just as likely to use the more advanced tactics on you, and many teams are frustratingly smart in that they never separate by more than 5 blocks. On the face of it, pitting 1 player against 2 equally skilled players is just nonsensical- I challenge you to think of another game where this is done (turn-based games like chess don't count). Teaming is something that is deeply rooted in MCSG, due it obviously being based on the Hunger Games movies- but in MCSG you can't kill somebody with one arrow to the chest, or blow up the cornucopia and with it your enemies food, can you? The comparison cannot be made- teaming in MCSG is far more overpowered than it is in the movies.

In the last game I played, I was up against a team of 3 in full iron with a seemingly endless supply of arrows and golden apples. We were the last 4 players and there was nothing I could have done to turn the game my way. I played to the best of abilities (and im no skrub, k?) and managed to take one of them out, but in a cramped deathmatch arena with no more golden apples, 5 hearts remaining and a diminished supply of arrows I stood no chance.

For me, what makes the survival games so intense is that, no matter how bad things are looking for you, there's always a chance you can clutch the win with some deathmatch heroics or tactical nous, but in situations like this you honestly might as well just /kill, and that completely ruins the game- the excitement is gone. And then when sh** like this happens, it makes me want to quit the game completely.



Of course people enjoy playing with friends, and I bet there are already some people getting ready to tell me that I'm just a loner who doesn't appreciate how fun it is, but you can play with friends without ruining everybody else's chances. I play with friends all the time, but whenever I do we always FFA or stay separate out of respect for the other players, which I find a lot more fun than going around gang banging randies. That said, teaming is still fun in itself, and of course clans must be considered. I would advocate dedicated servers for both- clan servers have been on the agenda for a while, so why not teaming servers too?

In my mind, teaming servers would work like this: there would be servers for 2 teams, and servers for 3 teams, and perhaps more. Upon joining the lobby, players would have a compass that when right clicked would bring up GUI with a list items named after all of the other players in the lobby, from which your teammates could be selected. When somebody else selects you, their item would change, and you would have to click it yourself in order to confirm the team (those who have played swish 2v2s and 3v3s will be familiar with this system). Once your team is made, you and your teammate's names shows up as a different colour in tablist, and in-game the players' names have a prefix with the team's colour in parentheses. When the lobby ends, players not in a team are kicked from the server. Deathmatches would be between 2 teams, i.e. at 3 or 4 players for 2 team servers, depending on whether a member had died. Scrim and clan battle servers would work similarly, with the designated leader selecting his teammates and them all having to confirm. Anyone not in a clan at the end of the lobby would spectate, and there would be no sponsoring. I don't know about you, but I would find teaming in a game where everyone else is teamed a lot more intense, and a lot more gratifying than teaming on a bunch of solo players.

Of course there are issues about enforcing the teams, but with coloured names in the tab menu and prefixes to people's displayed names it would be as easy as recording two players not attacking each other at close proximity. I'm anticipating a lot of disagreement, but I genuinely think that in order for MCSG to become as fun as it once was, radical steps need to be taken.
 
Last edited:
M

MrKorrenian

Guest
This idea has been cycled so many times man. Firstly, the idea behind taking away teams just isn't feasible. That's outlawing playing with friends basically, actually wait, that's exactly what that's doing. People have preached the idea of taking away teams since the beginning of this server and look where we are today. Even if MCSG would make it a reality think about how some of the community would react, you know, the ones who like to play MCSG for fun and predominantly with friends. Also think about how many people would be banned. Clans would be non existent and it would only be fun for so many people. Secondly, there is actually a thread of things that will never be implemented or if suggested will be skipped over http://www.minecraftsurvivalgames.com/threads/no-no-suggestions-updated-read-before-posting.32625/. Thirdly, you might just have to deal with it, teaming is something that has and always most likely will be part of these servers.

Having a rule like that wouldn't stop people, I guarantee that. People would figure out a way, were humans and we do that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

I_love_desk

Peacekeeper
Joined
Sep 28, 2013
Messages
631
Reaction score
1,153
As much as I hate getting teamed every single game, imo there is no realistic way to prevent teaming from happening without causing problems elsewhere. All of the suggestions generally made are complicated, hard to understand for new players (which then brings up the "I didn't know" excuse, and would ruin gameplay. It's a problem, but I don't think it's really fixable.
 

Siewer

Tribute
Joined
Dec 10, 2013
Messages
71
Reaction score
25
Agreed. I die to a team almost every game now. :C And I'm not a scrub, I have 154 wins and a 1/4.6 ratio
 

jonnysurvives

Peacekeeper
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
1,375
Reaction score
1,801
This idea has been cycled so many times man. Firstly, the idea behind taking away teams just isn't feasible. That's outlawing playing with friends basically, actually wait, that's exactly what that's doing. People have preached the idea of taking away teams since the beginning of this server and look where we are today. Secondly, there is actually a thread of things that will never be implemented or if suggested will be skipped over http://www.minecraftsurvivalgames.com/threads/no-no-suggestions-updated-read-before-posting.32625/. Thirdly and lastly, you might just have to deal with it, teaming is something that has and always most likely will be part of these servers.
Did you read the thread?
As much as I hate getting teamed every single game, imo there is no realistic way to prevent teaming from happening without causing problems elsewhere. All of the suggestions generally made are complicated, hard to understand for new players (which then brings up the "I didn't know" excuse, and would ruin gameplay. It's a problem, but I don't think it's really fixable.
To me that just sounds like conservative nonsense. I've described a perfectly feasible way of isolating teaming, and the 'I didn't know' problem is never, ever a valid excuse, especially if there are automated messages in the lobby, it says solo in the sidebar and in the hub there are huge signs saying 'solo', '2 team' etc when you choose what server to join.
 
M

MrKorrenian

Guest
Did you read the thread?

To me that just sounds like conservative nonsense. I've described a perfectly feasible way of isolating teaming, and the 'I didn't know' problem is never, ever an applicable excuse if there are automated messages, it says solo in the sidebar and in the hub there are huge signs saying 'solo', '2 team' etc
Nope, but I guess I have to now.

Oh man, another recycled idea. Servers for specific things or maps or donor or whatever has been proposed. The closest that has ever come was SG Classic, and thats technically a gamemode.

I digress though, good luck with whatever your trying to accomplish here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Bamber

Peacekeeper
Joined
Aug 13, 2013
Messages
1,426
Reaction score
883
While I do really wish there was some way to prevent things like this from happening, there really is no way that such a great change would happen.


Ok, I really don't know how to express what I'm saying, but basically I agree with you, but there just isn't a way.




: / Sry, I'm being bad at explaining.
 

Ian

Career
Joined
Jan 22, 2013
Messages
177
Reaction score
227
Teaming is a part of the game. Scratching it would go against the original concept of Hunger Games. You form a group or you play solo, and you fight to the death. Teaming has it's risks. While the network has it's share of "elite" players who play competitively, myself included, remember that most people that play here just want to play for the experience and fun of it. Petty restrictions like this only take away from the raw idea of the Hunger Games.
 

Siewer

Tribute
Joined
Dec 10, 2013
Messages
71
Reaction score
25
It's still unfair when you lose to a team of 2 people who are equal skilled or less skilled than you are almost every game.
Teaming is a part of the game. Scratching it would go against the original concept of Hunger Games. You form a group or you play solo, and you fight to the death. Teaming has it's risks. While the network has it's share of "elite" players who play competitively, myself included, remember that most people that play here just want to play for the experience and fun of it. Petty restrictions like this only take away from the raw idea of the Hunger Games.
 

RC_4777

Mockingjay
Joined
Feb 1, 2013
Messages
10,404
Reaction score
10,589
Do you really want to see scandals about bans determining whether or not someone was teamed in a game? How do you get evidence for a team? This rule would be broken to the point where it'd be near obsolete. People would try to find ways to cheat this all the time, and honestly, this will make more drama and problems for what it's worth.
 

jonnysurvives

Peacekeeper
Joined
Apr 8, 2013
Messages
1,375
Reaction score
1,801
Nope, but I guess I have to now.

Oh man, another recycled idea. Servers for specific things or maps or donor or whatever has been proposed. The closest that has ever come was SG Classic, and thats technically a gamemode.

I digress though, good luck with whatever your trying to accomplish here.
I don't see how it's a recycled idea when I've clearly brought new concepts of how to make teaming servers work to the table.
Teaming is a part of the game. Scratching it would go against the original concept of Hunger Games. You form a group or you play solo, and you fight to the death. Teaming has it's risks. While the network has it's share of "elite" players who play competitively, myself included, remember that most people that play here just want to play for the experience and fun of it. Petty restrictions like this only take away from the raw idea of the Hunger Games.
I say screw the original concept of the hunger games. The only risk of teaming if you're in call with your teammates (which most are nowadays) is losing to them in deathmatch. And I don't see how it's a 'petty restritcion'- it's something intended to liberate the solo player, without compromising those who want to team.
While I do really wish there was some way to prevent things like this from happening, there really is no way that such a great change would happen.


Ok, I really don't know how to express what I'm saying, but basically I agree with you, but there just isn't a way.




: / Sry, I'm being bad at explaining.
It's worth a try imo. Obviously I wouldn't want it to be suddenly introduced and 'classic' servers scratched, but rather be introduced for beta testing to see how players react to it, and then, if all goes well, have it replace the normal servers.
Do you really want to see scandals about bans determining whether or not someone was teamed in a game? How do you get evidence for a team? This rule would be broken to the point where it'd be near obsolete. People would try to find ways to cheat this all the time, and honestly, this will make more drama and problems for what it's worth.
It's not like there aren't scandals already. Determining if someone is teaming when they should be a lot easier than determining if someone is using clickaimbot- just look at how long they took to ban Austin_HackerGames. The line for teaming would have to be drawn at not attacking or running from another player while near them, which wouldn't be at all hard to prove imo.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
242,193
Messages
2,449,633
Members
523,972
Latest member
Atasci