This is why Random Sucks:

**Red_Lizard2** · 06-02-10, 05:22 PM

Originally Posted by Thorsen

Well you didn't piss me off, but you certainly confused me. It seems like you've contradicted yourself. First you say we shouldn't need captains because we should be able to make fair teams ourselves. Then you say we should... split up noobs/strat callers... which is what making captains is? Unless you mean we should somehow telepathically all come to a consensus on what the teams are and automatically switch to that when the lobby fills? Or you mean put it to a vote? Or just sort of... chose teams on a whim? It seems like picking two captains who are either the two noobiest or the two best and then mixing it up from there is both effective and efficient.

To me, if you need to name 2 people "captains" to pick from the other 6 people in the lobby, then something is wrong as that means the people can't actually see that "Gee this could end up uneven." All 8 people should be able to tell when you need to force people to be on opposite teams, but after that (unless it is an actual mixed of 1 great/good/avg/newb and 1 great/good/avg/newb) just random the rest.

When you need to name a couple people to pick from a group of 6 (8 but two are picking), to me, that seems like a problem within the community to begin with.

**flame** · 06-03-10, 12:21 AM

glad it bothers you... I will enjoy my game that had "picked" teams. It works for us.

**Thorsen** · 06-03-10, 02:19 AM

Originally Posted by Red_Lizard2

To me, if you need to name 2 people "captains" to pick from the other 6 people in the lobby, then something is wrong as that means the people can't actually see that "Gee this could end up uneven." All 8 people should be able to tell when you need to force people to be on opposite teams, but after that (unless it is an actual mixed of 1 great/good/avg/newb and 1 great/good/avg/newb) just random the rest.

When you need to name a couple people to pick from a group of 6 (8 but two are picking), to me, that seems like a problem within the community to begin with.

Okay, but again. How do you expect the 8 people to form teams? Should everyone sort of just pick a team when they join and hope it works out? Should they vote? Should each player give a team lineup they consider fair? Because to me, picking two experienced captains and letting them make fair teams is generally effective and also efficient. You say everyone should know when to force people on opposite teams... well yeah! Exactly! That's called making the two newest/two best players captains and going from there! That's exactly what we do!

**bobbarkerissatan** · 06-03-10, 11:19 AM

After a long string of unbalanced random games, sprinkled with a few team captain games, I can honestly say that I'm just not having fun playing L4D2 with random teams. Most of the team captain games have been exciting, close and a hell of a lot of fun to play and even if we do still manage to get destroyed, there's no "random luck" to blame. It just makes everything much more enjoyable and losses easier to take.

I can understand times when random works just fine, for example, when every player is pretty much solid and can hold their own weight. With a game like L4D2, where there are only three other teammates, it's just too easy to bring down your entire team with one inexperienced player when the other team has a four very solid players.

For now on I'm going to ask before joining a lobby if the game is going to be random or not, because quite frankly, I'd rather play something else than a random lobby game.

**Wraith** · 06-03-10, 07:54 PM

Damn it, hoping things have cooled off by now, because I think I'm ready to start getting back into games this weekend, although I'm keeping my own personal policies. I suppose if I get too annoying just tell me to mute myself.

**Bane** · 06-03-10, 09:12 PM

Originally Posted by Thorsen

Not forever Banana. At the rate you're improving we'll have to switch to someone else soon.

New noob captain reporting in! =P

**maximusboomus** · 06-03-10, 11:46 PM

Originally Posted by Wraith

Damn it, hoping things have cooled off by now, because I think I'm ready to start getting back into games this weekend, although I'm keeping my own personal policies. I suppose if I get too annoying just tell me to mute myself.

No need to mute yourself - we need to hear if you're hunted

We just need you to "be nice" we're all here to blow off steam and relax and many of us have our tolerance levels set lower because we wish to relax... Just keep the negativity down and you'll do fine.

**Red_Lizard2** · 06-04-10, 02:42 AM

Originally Posted by Thorsen

Okay, but again. How do you expect the 8 people to form teams? Should everyone sort of just pick a team when they join and hope it works out? Should they vote? Should each player give a team lineup they consider fair? Because to me, picking two experienced captains and letting them make fair teams is generally effective and also efficient. You say everyone should know when to force people on opposite teams... well yeah! Exactly! That's called making the two newest/two best players captains and going from there! That's exactly what we do!

no captains are there to pick 3 other players on their side as it is the only way to make it "Fair" apparently. Meaning only a few people in the community apparently can actually tell when things may be slightly unbalanced (Which in my opinion, is pathetic).

IF you have leaders Player_A and Player_B and newbs Player_C and Player_D, someone should easily be able to say (and note not something picks as a "capt." just anyone in the lobby) hey A and C can you join infected and B and D can you join survivors? Then you have similar level Player_E, Player_F, Player_X, and Player_Y that can random.

**Bane** · 06-04-10, 02:51 AM

Having captains establishes a semblance of order in the lobby. I've played both random and team games, and have had more success in terms of game balance with team captains choosing teams than on random. Granted we had a seemingly good team balance yesterday and got trounced in Realism Vs.... but I digress. The next game we did the same procedure and didn't have a 1000 point spread (70 actually).

At the same time, not everyone knows each other in the community. I'm meeting new people in game every day and have no idea what their skill level is for L4D2. I come from a background of CSS and DODS, yet I'm still learning how to play MP L4D2. I've had the game since it came out yet only played online campaign mode. You can't judge a book by it's cover and having a balance of skill will prevent shutouts and teams pretty much giving up by the 3rd/4th leg of the game. That and L4D2 games are long, which adds to frustration and discouragement when your team is just being rolled over. There are multiple variables such as environment, horde density, when the tank comes out, etc that players need to account for. Thorsen mentioned something in game that I hadn't considered. Some people panic when being attacked by SI... say their vision is blurry due to boomer vomit, etc. Having experienced people help out new players is essential if you want them to improve.

While 4 v 4 may seem like too small a number to pick teams, it does work in my opinion.

**Kanati** · 06-04-10, 10:09 AM

Originally Posted by maximusboomus

So to diversify a little branch the topic in a new direction opinions on this:

If a game has had captains and is TRUELY stacked is it bad form to return to lobby 1/2 way through a game to say enoughs enough or is it better to suck it up and play dispite both teams happiness & satisfaction levels wayyy down due to the stackerage of the game

I know Kanati is going to say suck it up ladies and play hahahahaha I am of the same school the teams were chosen now accept them.

I'm WAY behind on this thread for some reason... Playing catch up.

I would rather return to lobby if the losing team doesn't much care about the game any more, and if there's time... start a new game. That's if the game is halfway through... If it's after one map? not so much. If it's going into the finale? Not so much. If the game is within say... 500 points... not so much.