|
Post by Ellestar on Feb 17, 2006 6:08:46 GMT -5
I don't know what is going on in a ladder, but in last 5 teamers i played in 4 of them someone in my team dies at the very start of the game (10-20 turns, sometimes 30). And before that it wasn't significantly better either. Am i so unlucky or it happens every time? So far it seems that it's better to quit a teamer immediately (don't even start playing) if it comes that i should be one of the captains (and i don't like to be a captain anyway). I don't know other players so it's quite masochistic to play in such teamer. I still has more than 50% win/loss ratio solely because of ctons (thankfully, i was in a 1st place in all ctons but one, mostly because of luck).
But that's not all. The way how some players are playing incites an awe and terror in souls of their allies. For example, +8 food sulprus in a capital from irrigated plains and flood plains... That's a player who's on a front and is under attack at that moment. All nearby hills but one are unimproved. He said after a game that he uses automated workers. ROFL Still, he's somehow in top 50 players at that moment. Another one from the same game. OneSong says: 2nd line players should focus on research and great scientists. So, i have a nice ~70 research capital already, one scientist was used for Education and one for Academy. My ally (who was also behind) has a library, he almost completed a univercity, NO COTTAGES in capital even on flood plains and 20 research from his capital... TT This makes me cry.
But that's still ok. Some players in teamers just move their units from a capital and die to one warrior... I clearly remember 3 such cases and maybe i already forgot one or two.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Feb 17, 2006 9:11:04 GMT -5
the problem is the lack of experienced players playing civ4 - as u need some guys for a teamer there ll be some noobs aswell.
But after 3 games in a row loosing to described prblems (there are also some who loose their 1. 2 workers and not only die but even help other team) I now decided aswell to become elitest and dont play anymore with these dumbs. Its just frustrating and no fun.
Better to play a 2-2 as a 4-4 with 4 players where u have to hope that they dont die in t15 and ruin fun for all but some dumbs on other team who dont figure that it wasnt their skill which made em win
|
|
|
Post by Magzi on Feb 17, 2006 9:34:46 GMT -5
Aw, I'll never get to learn how to play in a teamer. Not managed one yet so can't ever be experienced now
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Feb 17, 2006 12:39:51 GMT -5
Aw, I'll never get to learn how to play in a teamer. Not managed one yet so can't ever be experienced now Nah. Actually, i'm saying about a different things. Players shouldn't learn game basics in teamers, especially in a ladder ones. After all, it's not that hard to build workers and improve land (and it's faster to learn how to do it in singleplayer anyway). I mean, come on, players are supposed to play a tutorial before multiplayer ladder teamers. And it's not that hard to defend your capital from a warrior when you have nothing else to defend. There are forums with a lot of good articles that teach you how to play. And you'll learn how to play faster by both reading forums and playing compared to just playing. If you want to learn how to play in a teamer... Well, it's actually very simple. Listen to more experienced players, manage your economy well, try to plan your actions according to a general plan. Help teammates when need. Everything else is the same as in other game types if you don't need to plan a general strategy. That's basically it. Teamer is the easiest game type. You'll not win nuts in cton if you have a sucky economy or you can't defend against one warrior. But you can get a free win in a teamer even if you suck. So, players don't need to learn how to play teamers. Players should first and foremost learn how to play the game itself.
|
|
|
Post by Atomation on Feb 17, 2006 14:28:26 GMT -5
A city with 8 surplus food could actually outproduce a city harnessing hills, with clever use of slavery.
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Feb 17, 2006 14:38:03 GMT -5
By far and away the worst team playes I've seen are usually non noobs who try and force there game plan on everyone despite it being totally wrong.
And Magzi you can play in my team any day. ;D
Most noobs know to do exactly what the more experienced players tell them, that's how they get to be non noobs, to ban them outright is not only against the ladder ethos but it's also pretty stupid, as you'll lessen the pool of decent players you can play with. If you want to pick out a few you wont play with on a teamer fine, but I suggest singling out all noobs is a dangerous message to advocate.
|
|
|
Post by civerdan on Feb 17, 2006 14:46:57 GMT -5
In my experience, teamers are most unbalanced when and experienced player if directly opposite a inexperienced one who is either isolated by distance from nearest teamate or has another relatively inexperienced player backing them up. I hate being on the North side in a ren ring teamer and having the guy on the south side let his opponent walk into his city with a longbow or having a teamate building hermitage in his cap on turn 25 even when you are captain and tell him to build something else.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on Feb 17, 2006 15:58:17 GMT -5
oh well, it might be better to learn basics yourself then to advise others to do
the worst things is that these dudes dont even follow advise - if u say get pikes they get cities if u say watch your worker it s gonne in 2 turns if u say move fast they watch and wait what happens .....
|
|
agent_x7
Settler
Agent of Truth
Posts: 65
|
Post by agent_x7 on Feb 17, 2006 17:32:49 GMT -5
damn noobs. Ladder should have been invite only from the start, now theres a bunch of crap in it. I've seen people killed before turn 20 before, I killed 1 guy who only had 1 warrior in his capital and waited while my 2 archers approached. However, noobiness is not the only cause of this. If the team fails to support the frontline players, then they are doomed. Once I played a teamer with Mr. Gametheory, and he ordered us to change to pasifism/focus on great people so we could get education before the other team. Myself and another player were on the front line, while gametheory was safely in the rear. By turn 30, the other player, who was next to game theory, died and gametheory had to depend on his neighbor for military support. Then, when our team was on the verge of a counter attack, he gambled all our military resources on a poorly planned amphibious attack, and even while I was winning on my front, he surrendered. Sometimes the problem is due to noobs, other times it is due to narcissist team nazis.
|
|
|
Post by MMV on Feb 17, 2006 18:24:31 GMT -5
are you and umbra the same person? same IP?
|
|
|
Post by deviousdevil on Feb 17, 2006 20:08:16 GMT -5
Think listening to OneSong was a fatal error Ellestar.
|
|
|
Post by Ellestar on Feb 18, 2006 3:40:23 GMT -5
the worst things is that these dudes dont even follow advise - if u say get pikes they get cities if u say watch your worker it s gonne in 2 turns if u say move fast they watch and wait what happens ..... Well, i made one mistake around a turn 12-15 and everything else was a result of my mistake. But you didn't help me with military either (isn't that a common mistake as well? ), and even enemy team said that i was 1 vs 2.
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Feb 18, 2006 5:08:09 GMT -5
Well mentioning no names I started next to another player very close in a 4v4 teamer; I asked for iron and was assured it was on its way couple of turns, ten turns later I placed a city to get iron seing that I wouldn't be getting it anytime soon, I also asked almost imediately the religion was founded that people get religion to me via missionaries as I would need it, and it's handy anyway, I also asked that people at the rear funnel troops to those on the front line: I reminded them that is their job. Expand and get troops out asap. About turn 20 or so I had recieved 2 Longbowmen in total prior to this I said I'm going to get rolled I'm toast, which was a response to the lack of interest in spreading religion and the limited support. Couldn't expand my borders using library as didn't have time to build too hard pressed. Fighting off musketmen by now. Had suggested a few turns earlier we get musketmen because they had Gunpowder. Chopped with no border expansion as best as possible for units. Asked for horses as mine were cut, near the front line unfortunately, nothing; also an annoying amount of lag was causing me to move about 4/5 turns after the start of the turn which didn't help. I died about turn 50 to a great deal of surprise to mockery and dersion, it was your fault they said, why didn't you chop your forests, couldn't expand, why not build libraries: sigh, yes very clever ping 20 locations on the map I can't chop because on turn 50 my civ has only just recieved religion, genius, nice teamwork guys oh and where are those horse I asked for, probably went the same way as the Iron that was coming in 2 turns ? nm. The funniest thing was that they were actually surprised: WTF!!! WTF!! Despite one player saying it not 8 turns before that I was getting hammered and suggesting I get some support which needless to say wasn't forthcoming. One player actually said it was a 1v1 fight that's all lol, of course?!?! silly me Thanks guys 3 longbowmen in support in 50 turns? Whilst the other frontline player who had horse and iron got more support than I did? Stupidity is definately not the preserve of noobs, like we say, those fools with the biggest voice and who are bad at team play are the most dangerous, hope they learnt a lesson about teamwork, I certainly learned to distinguish between those who know how to play on teams and those who think they do.
|
|
|
Post by swissy on Feb 18, 2006 7:33:03 GMT -5
It ain't noobs all the time. Try defending a ren teamer when you are frontman with no metal in first cities and the Arabs are right next to you. In ten turns they can have 3-4 camel archers and your pretty much done unless you started chopping longbows from the start or you have trade network to a teammate with iron.
|
|
|
Post by whiplash on Feb 18, 2006 9:05:52 GMT -5
It seems there are not many good team players on either ladder. Some of the so-called elite players on the other ladder don't know the first thing about team play. They try for an early kill and if they don't get it and are weak to the counterattack they want to concede. They don't even seem to know, or care for that matter, that their teammates are building up for a nice sledge.
|
|
|
Post by markweston on Feb 18, 2006 11:42:38 GMT -5
Oh look, some more smug ladder vets whining about noobs. The last time I heard all this was last night from a top-ten ladder player and team captain who spent ten minutes singing this song, and in the end threatened to walk off until we re-arranged the teams to suit him. Then guess who got eliminated in the first 30 turns? Get over yourselves. There is a tiny handful of players I've seen who play consistently well. The rest of us screw up and play like newbs at regular intervals. So let's demonstrate maturity and show some consideration to new ladder members. I for one don't want to be playing the same dozen usual suspects day in and day out for the next six months.
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Feb 18, 2006 12:06:35 GMT -5
Wel Said Mark. I think Whiplash is referring to the lack of good team players in general, it is a more refined skill and it takes more practice to behave in a selfless manner in game for the greater good. I agree with the sentiment though, don't limit who you play with based on one bad performance, everyone has off days, and noobs need to be encouraged or as I said you end up with a small pool of potential talent, and that's just a fact.
Having played a few futures in c3c I know precisely who and what he's talking about, You play with Say Whip and he'll work as a team to kick your arse, you play with xxxx and you can count on him doing only what he needs to get some glory and then bitching when it doesn't pay off and he leaves himself open to getting rolled by those with the ability to use teamwork. You see it alot, team games are about what you can do for the team full stop, the beauty of CIv is unlike C3c you know precisely what any memeber of your team is doing, keep your eyes open for trouble and ping warnings at your team of anything they might have missed. Acceed that going for Iron is more important than horse if two players have UU's that need iron and or don't have bronze.
|
|
Midgard
Worker
Captain of LoD
Posts: 103
|
Post by Midgard on Feb 18, 2006 17:40:20 GMT -5
There is one motto that holds very true that I have learned from other TBS games "The only true sign of skill is how well you do in a team game", thats not verbatim but you get the point. People underestimate how much of a skill it is to be a truly effective team player, and Both Ladders revolving around the CCC's just means that team play is the most needed ability, but not everyone has it, hence the ctons and 1v1's.
|
|
|
Post by Magzi on Feb 18, 2006 19:39:17 GMT -5
Well, when I actually manage to play one of these illusionary games I'm sure do exist, I will vote and comment!
|
|
|
Post by Sidhe on Feb 19, 2006 4:28:56 GMT -5
Yes they're played direct ip usually and there invitational only. Plus Tommy and the rest seem to have a strange notion that noobs aren't worth the effort, noobs being anyone who's played less than 100 games. Consequently the top ten atm are the top ten team players as far as I can tell cause no other player can get a look in hehe a little bit controversial Midgard is absolutely spot on, I've seen some pretty awful examples of bad team play. It's a skill it, takes practice to acquire it, some players never will and should stick to ctons, fortunately they are a rarity.
|
|