Thread: Even teams up during a match?

Originally Posted by ¤[BlitzKrieg]¤

However, on the note of a nooby night, I won't be able to participate in any of it until Monday. Going turkey hunting, leaving tomorrow early afternoon.

And for booms... they may be a bit disorienting, but you can easily make out shapes of things and you can hear. It isn't hard to see through unless perhaps you are in a cloud of smoke. Just focus and believe, you will be able to see.

Try not to overcompensate for whatever downloads you have blitz

Originally Posted by Thorsen

If you can make it blitz we can do one tomorrow night. We'll just have me lead one team and blitz lead another team, not playing to win but playing to learn. We'll test out strategies, learn new skills and tactics etc.

That sounds like a great idea but one go round isn't going to solve everything. Perhaps we can make a it a once a week occurrence, such as every Friday night at 8pm Central.


As for some things Blonde was saying - I was in that game with him where there were 4 decent players against 3 damn good vets and a decent player. It was apparent from the get-go it was going to be an assraping but we hung in for the first round to see how it went and subsequently asked for a team switch - which was wholeheartedly denied. I know the feeling - "Man, this is awesome, we're playing extremely well together and we're smashing on those guys." - but that is where the fun ends for the other, anal gaped, team. At the point where you try everything, are stuffed at 70 points for three straight maps; it gets old, real, real old. These everyday public games are not tournament games where you try to obliterate the other team with no regard to respective skill levels, to me that is not what TPG is about. Of course the objective is to win and there have been times where I have told my team straight up, "Let's destroy them," but if it gets to the point where it can no longer be fun for the other team it is time to switch things up.

If asskickings are allowed why should we stop there? If one team is okay with kicking the others' ass, why can't the other say "Fuck this, we're outmatched. Let's return to lobby." Would any of you stand for that?

The veterens know damn well that some players are just too slow to help and aren't very good. Some lesser players have a hard time with awareness and are destined to not kill that hunter, charger, etc quick enough. You veterens know this and what can that team do? Tell the player to play better? C'mon it is not that cut and dry. Some people just aren't very good and need to either play on a good team or play against a team that isn't overpowered.

Out of all people who would understand the need to even teams, the veterens are the ones not wanting to switch. If y'all don't want to play with bad players, ask them to leave. I see it time and time again, a veteren slip in to see who is in the lobby and quickly leave because they don't like the lineup. That's fine but it goes to show what kind of players some of you are.

And I will also admit to saying that I don't always want to play every game with new people. I don't remember what thread it is in, but when you play 19 out of 20 games with brand new players that you have to explain every possible aspect of the game to at all times only to end up losing, it is no longer fun. When this was happening I didn't realize how little fun I was having until I played a game with 3 good teammates again . . . oh lord how sweet it was.

This is not to say that I hate teaching new people how to play or refuse to do it, i actually really enjoy it. But I challenge anyone to play 3 weeks worth of games where all you do is talk non-stop guiding your teammates and losing every game. The last game I played my team lost by a score of like 600 to 3000, we had 2 new players and were totally outclassed, but I'd like to think that the guys on my team at least learned a few things from me.

Originally Posted by Raush

I am against team balancing, if the skill level of players in the lobby is clearly not equal you should have captains to avoid the rape that will happen. It is then in the captains hands to pick a team that they think has a chance of winning. If skill level between all players is relatively even, random it up and best of luck to both teams.

For the sake of argument I have had lobbies where it seemed as though random would be fine because of a nice veteran to newer player ratio. Then the game loads and it couldn't have gotten anymore lopsided. I assume some say, "Play on."



Also, another thing to note about finishing a lopsided game and adjusting for the next game, about half of the players in a room leave after a single game so that logic basically goes out the window. In theory it makes total sense and I wouldn't have a problem with taking a beating if I knew we'd play again but pick teams instead of random but its not fun to hope for one game, get your ass handed to you, and hop off. I think if we can minimize the chances of lopsided games the better it is for everyone.

Originally Posted by Scotzo

Try not to overcompensate for whatever downloads you have blitz

Wut?

Originally Posted by Train wreck

For the sake of argument I have had lobbies where it seemed as though random would be fine because of a nice veteran to newer player ratio. Then the game loads and it couldn't have gotten anymore lopsided. I assume some say, "Play on."

Notice how i said if the skill level is not equal you should have captains. Equal skill levels would be defined as all players being of equal skill.

A nice ratio of good to bad players doesn't mean anything when all the bad players end up on the same team. If you have 5 great players and 3 new players you sure as hell better have captains because you know the 3 new guys are going to be on the same team.

Originally Posted by Raush

Notice how i said if the skill level is not equal you should have captains. Equal skill levels would be defined as all players being of equal skill.

A nice ratio of good to bad players doesn't mean anything when all the bad players end up on the same team. If you have 5 great players and 3 new players you sure as hell better have captains because you know the 3 new guys are going to be on the same team.

To clarify, when I say "newer" I mean those decent players who have played for a few weeks or months but who aren't "great." Those who don't need to be taught the basics but who are still a work in progress.

No I completely understand that Trainwreck, and honestly thats a crappy position to be in for the up and coming players. You've been around long enough that the vets feel like you should know what you're doing by now, but you are not yet to a level where you can really be counted on 100% to cover your teammates or hit at the right time. We've all been there and it sucks, but honestly a little bit of practice goes a long way and you can get out of that awkward position quickly.

I would say that 2 out of 3 matches in CS:S I am talking constantly to 95% of my team who are new to the servers and have no sense of teamplay and our TPG ways. It sucks, but I don't disconnect and go to the other server. As a regular and veteran css player it is my duty to stick with it and teach my terrorists team and try to point them in right direction. It should be the same way in LFD2, especially with admins. If you see a lobby full of average players you shouldn't make it a habit of waiting for all your friends to come online and then leave out all the average players.

I am all for the "Learning Sessions". It would be awesome and any new player should really consider playing in these sessions. I'll definitely be on tonight and tomorrow night if we want to try to get some lobbies going.

Come learn tomorrow with Blitz, Thor and I or....