[GP/UI] 2-player "team" games (Polymorphic)

[thebest712]

looks great for me, then the team medailles are easyer to get :p

[ahunda]

For what it´s worth: Poll added.

Spread the word ...

[Big Whiskey]

I am all for this.I don't know if this has been mentioned or not but I think it would stop some players from creating 2 accounts.Sometimes a player creates 2 accounts to play only in team games.Having this new option would stop that imo.Also,it should be made that you can't join any "team games."What I mean exactly is,say if a cadet and a cook created a doubles game.One player should not be allowed to join that game being able to control both moves.The new A+A player against the B+B player should be in it's own setting.Let the players that want to play team games keep doing so.And let the players that want this new setting,play against the players that want it also.

[AAFitz]

disagree cheph - i think it would completely take over in all areas. the effect on clans in particular would be catastrophic. what would be the point of having a partner other than yourself? i don't buy into the 2 heads are better than one thing very much. the best teams are those that play the game the same way. amongst the upper echelons in particular the effect would be extremely pronounced.

this option negates so much of the camaraderie and fun left in CC for me.

it would be interesting, don't get me wrong. i'd like to see how everyone is standing on one pair of feet and all that, but the price to pay is far too heavy for the community of this website. i hope (and suspect) that it will never be implemented.

you would be right that it would ruin team games if one person could play against a team...but the team games would remain...this would just be in addition to them as 1v1 games.

[Mr Changsha]

As a sequential player I really don't bother with 1vs 1 due to the luck factor. I think (and have thought for a long time) that this option would open up a new game style for many sequential players. Would it be a preferred style for many current dubs, trips and quads players? For some probably yes...those that 'run' teams may prefer quads 1vs 1, but then I suspect that some of those that run teams specifically enjoy the team format due to the opportunity to lead. I doubt therefore they would seriously consider switching over long-term.

A second factor in support of this idea is that I am quite positive there are a significant number of players who would like to play team games but can't (for whatever reason) find 'decent' players to play with. You see them joining random teams all the time and then naturally getting smashed by established teams. These types of players would benefit from the style as well.

Personally, I'd probably play it a bit but not all that much... but then I prefer standard games overall. Many though would see this as an improvement to the site and it should be considered on that basis.

[Hatchman]

Would be great to see this come into effect. Good idea Ahunda.

[prismsaber]

For those who think this would encourage farming or otherwise unfair play...you are wrong. If one is going for points it's more beneficial to team up with some lower ranks rather than do the "1v1 team game." All this new game option would be for is bragging rights and clan play, but definitely not points.

[Bruceswar]

For those who think this would encourage farming or otherwise unfair play...you are wrong. If one is going for points it's more beneficial to team up with some lower ranks rather than do the "1v1 team game." All this new game option would be for is bragging rights and clan play, but definitely not points.

Bingo! Now get premium when this comes out and I will kick your ass real quick

[yeti_c]

Suggested before - would be great... no chance it'll get done in the next decade.

C.

[oVo]

If you can't find team mates that support each other and know how to work together well, Retool your clan or find better mates.

This concept creates a new 1v1 option and is not replacing the "team games" format.
I think it would level the playing field and make some very competitive 1v1 games

[pimpdave]

Some knob claiming to be from Denmark sent me the following PM:

Hey all.

I know, I am a big stupid idiot with nothing but terrible ideas and lots of time to spend PMing people about them, but I would like to be able to control everything in life and I demand this be implemented. I was inspired to suggest this once more in the Sugs & Bugs forum by the voices in my head (they also tell me to burn things).

Maybe you want to support the idea in the thread (and/or even spread the word to clan-mates & CC friends) ? Maybe enough support will at least provoke a reaction & some official feedback? If you don't, I will shake my fist at you and call you many unsavory names.

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=109621

Cheers from Denmark.

[jpcloet]

Adding a 1v1 option, that is not so heavily dependent on luck as the current 1v1 games, where first turn advantage & dice often decide the game within the first 2 rounds.

The problem is really the maps then and not the team concept. This is a secondary solution and I'd only support it fully if it meant no points games and part of a new 1v1 ladder system for the site.

[FarangDemon]

I'd love to be able to play a 1-on-1 game against an opponent and not feel like luck was going to be a huge factor. This discourages score-minded players from playing 1-on-1 against lower ranked. Not just because of losing the points, 1-on-1 just becomes a one-sided game very rapidly. I don't even play it against peers because I like an interesting game, not one decided in the first 1, 2 or 3 rounds. I'd play the hell out of 1-on-1 trips or quads and I'd be happy to play against people half my score because I believe luck is greatly mitigated.

To those who think this will displace the team option because nobody will want to play teams anymore I say this:

1) No it won't. Clans determine how clans play and since most clans like to play regular team games for their challenges and in CLA, regular team games will continue to predominate.
2) Even if there was a popular movement to replace team games with 1-on-1 team games in clan challenges, if that is what everybody really wanted, then that is what everybody really wanted so everybody would in that case be happy.

You guys afraid of seducing yourselves? Afraid you're going to like a new option too much is ridiculous. If you think the social aspect of games is important now then you will think so in the future. And if you change what you like, how is that necessarily bad? You are still living in a closet by yourself playing a game on the internet, it is not as if your social network would be getting destroyed anyway. You can still play team games against whoever you want. Please allow the 72% of people who voted yes to enjoy taking it to a new level of competitiveness where a 1-on-1 variant can actually be fun.

[Mageplunka69]

sounds like a great idea, could be alot of fun.....such different ways to win then lol

[Timminz]

sounds like a great idea, could be alot of fun.....such different ways to win then lol

Killing yourself for a re-cash in an escalating game, for instance.

[Nephilim]

Adding a 1v1 option, that is not so heavily dependent on luck as the current 1v1 games, where first turn advantage & dice often decide the game within the first 2 rounds.

The problem is really the maps then and not the team concept. This is a secondary solution and I'd only support it fully if it meant no points games and part of a new 1v1 ladder system for the site.

how do you go from "first turn and dice" being the problem to "this is a map problem"? i see that first turn in some maps, where players start with 12/15/18 terrs is a problem.....but dude, he said dice, and you jumped to maps.....

[Snowgun]

you would be right that it would ruin team games if one person could play against a team...but the team games would remain...this would just be in addition to them as 1v1 games.

This is also rubbish, as long as it was possible to make settings that allowed/disallowed such games. 4 vs 1 in a quads game would be fun and make for some great tournament ideas.

Plus 2v2 quads would be great as well, and would solve some of these same drop/turn problems that plague 1v1 (though in lesser magnitude).

You guys need to remember that this is a game, and any further options how to play the game would be a good thing (you are not being forced). Your ranks and clan standings are a side show, and on CC represent a minority view.

[barterer2002]

Truthfully I don't understand why anyone thinks it would kill team games. To me that seems silly. Essentially what its saying is that nobody would play team games if they didn't have to because nobody enjoys them and just play because they have to which is feeling that I reject entirely. In general I look at this as an addition to game options not a subtraction but I guess not everyone does. For what its worth though, it has my support.

[oVo]

I also see this as a positive direction for alternative ways to play the game and this idea has my full support as well. I hope Lack and the rest of the CC staff who explore the potential of new options will give this concept some serious consideration.

The option of playing a 1v1 "team game" with armies/bonus/deployment divided and segmented into multiple turns each round offers a wide range of competitive possibilities.

[pimpdave]

By the way, for the record, I was only picking on the guy who sent me that PM because it was easy to do so. I don't actually care about this idea, or whatever. If it goes through, I'll probably try out the game play. I just thought it was funny to lampoon someone for attempting a grassroots PM campaign to drum up support for his Suggs & Buggs thread, especially by sending PMs to players he doesn't know, has never played with, and who have never interacted with him/her on the fora before.

Soooooooooooo BOOM GOES THE DYNAMITE.

[Knight2254]

I voted no -- a pretty awful idea after you think through the details. Doesn't Herpes basically already do this anyways?

[Timminz]

Doesn't Herpes basically already do this anyways?

Definitely not. Even if he did what you seem to be accusing, he wouldn't be playing in the way that this suggestion would make possible. To do so, would mean playing against just one (1) opponent.

[the.killing.44]

I voted no -- a pretty awful idea after you think through the details.

I dunno man, what do you mean here? All the details I see are pretty freaking sweet.

[Knight2254]

Doesn't Herpes basically already do this anyways?

Definitely not. Even if he did what you seem to be accusing, he wouldn't be playing in the way that this suggestion would make possible. To do so, would mean playing against just one (1) opponent.

I don't think I'm accusing him of anything -- just leaving directions for the n00bs he plays with and thus is essentially playing a team game by himself.

It seems like the same thing can be accomplished by removing a territory bonus in 1v1 games.

[AAFitz]

you would be right that it would ruin team games if one person could play against a team...but the team games would remain...this would just be in addition to them as 1v1 games.

This is also rubbish, as long as it was possible to make settings that allowed/disallowed such games. 4 vs 1 in a quads game would be fun and make for some great tournament ideas.

Plus 2v2 quads would be great as well, and would solve some of these same drop/turn problems that plague 1v1 (though in lesser magnitude).

You guys need to remember that this is a game, and any further options how to play the game would be a good thing (you are not being forced). Your ranks and clan standings are a side show, and on CC represent a minority view.

its not rubbish at all, if all team games could be joined by one player as an opponent...it really would become so difficult to play actual team games, simply because one person would join so many of the other team games...so it would kill them, if it wasnt a controlled option, which gets confusing