|
Post by alice on May 9, 2006 20:06:08 GMT -5
yes swissy nothing chafes me worse then having a subpar player pinging his ass off and telling you what to do, in civ 3 if your teamate sucked they would simply die, now though you have a chance to presuade them to suck less, they may not listen, or far worse they may tell you how to play your civ,. this has made the game somewhat more hostile due to players seeing the stupid mistakes of teammembers
some players act like because it is a team game and they are not on the front lines, that they are not at war at all, I wish they would just play a no war game rather then join a team game though. but far worse then these uncooperative ignoramous's are the knowitalll mega-ping players with a 50% win ration that keep calling you an idiot for ....
anyhow i notice there are many less games around, especially at night too bad really
|
|
|
Post by Tony on May 9, 2006 20:24:14 GMT -5
Being able to see EVERYTHING your ally is doing is just pure evil IMO.
I really try and avoid over pinging, unless something important is happening or it is needed to coordinate attack. But i can totally understand those that ping like crazy, sometimes you feel like ripping your hair out when somsone does silly stuff then dont do nothing about it.
As for less games thats simply not true, the number of reports has been around 400-500 since almost day 1.
|
|
|
Post by deyreepher on May 9, 2006 20:32:37 GMT -5
How many of you have actively tried to school a sub-par ladder teamer player after the game without throwing out the term noob in their face? Even if you did blatantly call them noobs, how many of you apologized and then offered to improve their gameplay?
From the sounds of it, the ones railing against the less experienced players probably do not. I find that a shame.
I do admit though, tommy has put up some good strategy posts on forums, but that's a far cry from actively spoon feeding a player the tools and tricks they need to know to do well in team games. However, playing with a player you know may lose a game for you has its advantages if both agree to go through some of the mistakes that were made after the fact.
Maybe it's a cultural thing....where I come from, it's the amount of effort one puts in over the long run, rather than the immediate failures that paints who an individual is.
|
|
|
Post by tommynt on May 9, 2006 22:04:25 GMT -5
wish u were rught avo - u arent - there are peopel learning doing their best and stuff but there are some other duds just not and i prefer not to play then to paly with this sort
|
|
|
Post by zerza on May 9, 2006 22:13:14 GMT -5
So what about the brainless people testing this game? "duh, we cant find bugs in hours of testing that any consumer will encounter the first time they enter lobby, duh, what bugs, I just wanna play civ cuz it looks soooo pretty,,, duh. ." Comment directed at direct hire testers of Firaxis. Or at least at QA management of firaxis, these guys are truly idiots. Musta got their degree from that damn infomercial that keeps coming on
|
|
|
Post by weaksauce on May 9, 2006 22:24:30 GMT -5
How many of you have actively tried to school a sub-par ladder teamer player after the game without throwing out the term noob in their face? Even if you did blatantly call them noobs, how many of you apologized and then offered to improve their gameplay? From the sounds of it, the ones railing against the less experienced players probably do not. I find that a shame. I do admit though, tommy has put up some good strategy posts on forums, but that's a far cry from actively spoon feeding a player the tools and tricks they need to know to do well in team games. However, playing with a player you know may lose a game for you has its advantages if both agree to go through some of the mistakes that were made after the fact. Maybe it's a cultural thing....where I come from, it's the amount of effort one puts in over the long run, rather than the immediate failures that paints who an individual is. i've done 30-45 min tutorials with mulitple ladder players... some turn out ok like Sebsss... some never quite catch on. it's kind of hit or miss.... like anything, experience matters most...
|
|
|
Post by zerza on May 9, 2006 22:28:29 GMT -5
Well, I'm a fan of quite arguably the most DIFFICULT RTS to ever come out. It has more strategy in one minute of play then any RTS has in an entire session. One false move and you died. thats that.
It brings me to this quote.
"Stupid people are the canaries in the coal mine of life"
|
|
|
Post by zerza on May 9, 2006 22:33:11 GMT -5
The one's who play alone and not for the team either: A-learn to play as a team B-Play ctons C-Quit ladder So you guys lose a few games because of players who don't know what they are doing. Big whoop! If even 1/2 of those noobs decide to stay on ladder, you will have friends to play with for months to come....Statements like these will only diminish the number of people who wish to play with you. Negative Avo : A-learn to play as a team with decent players B-Play ctons C-Quit playing teamers wiht those smart guys Your post have 2 dimension. At first u said quit ladder but at the end of post u was worrying about of less people in ladder. Lestat, dont troll Avo, he made a good point.
|
|
|
Post by Lestat on May 9, 2006 23:45:08 GMT -5
Negative Avo : A-learn to play as a team with decent players B-Play ctons C-Quit playing teamers wiht those smart guys Your post have 2 dimension. At first u said quit ladder but at the end of post u was worrying about of less people in ladder. Lestat, dont troll Avo, he made a good point. Yup maybe hes post was to unreasponable to me.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on May 10, 2006 0:22:32 GMT -5
I don't know, man, I find it hard to believe that veterans are being that abrasive to anyone that doesn't deserve it.
I was a teamer newbie (although an experienced non-ladder player) about two or two and a half months ago when I played my first renaissance teamer, which was with Nero and IIRC lporiginalg, and they were very helpful and nice because, well, in a 3v3v3v3 you want to have good teammates so you don't lose. My second I believe was with Willburn, Nero, and another or two against tommy, weaksauce, and some other folks; that was my first time on the front lines and my team was extremely helpful, for the same reason; they didn't want my newbie ass to splat on the sidewalk.
Why would a good player want to f**k up his record by not helping his teammates in need?
On the other hand, if I had done anything less than work my ass off every turn trying to figure out the best course of action and do the right thing, I wouldn't be surprised if my teammates bitched at me, and they would have every right to. Nobody has the right to f**k up serious ladder players by playing a nutsty failing game when they are not giving 100% effort to it, and even if the vets wanted to put up with that anyway, they probably wouldn't be able to pound much into the head of such a player.
I suspect that accounts for most of the people who are experiencing harsh treatment.
|
|
|
Post by Necrominousss on May 10, 2006 0:25:09 GMT -5
Personally, I like being in teamer were I am the last person picked.
Being able to gift units and see every move your teammates do seems to really add to the frustration in teamers. I don't blame the designers of the game because on paper it sounds like it would be a great improvement and an amazing thing to have infinite knowledge of your teammates actions. The gifting units and tech sharing and all that seemed fantastic at first but later on became annoying.
It's kinda like socialism. On paper, it would seem like society could create a utopia but when you add the human factor into the equation, in a practical environment, it just doesn't work . Peoples behavior changes in unforeseen ways over time.
The reason teamers don't work so well for me is because, in the end, I'm a private person, which I would guess most people are. People looking over my shoulder that closely is not appreciated.
I also consider my self independent and even though I enjoy the camaraderie of teamers very much, I also enjoyed being my own person within the team. Coordinating attacks is more exciting then just gifting units. On the other hand it also makes less sense to not let one person have control of all the units. One person can almost always manage the units quicker and change tactics, if need be, better than two separate people which leaves most people just watching and hoping.
Throw in watching someone do something you think is very inefficient to the point of being idiotic or launching cannon fodder to the opponents to just increase their strength doesn't help one stay calm.
In civ3 you didn't have to look at that.(ignorance is bliss) We mainly just played our own game but tried to work together when we could, So even when you lost it seemed more enjoyable.
So far I have played mostly on inland sea. The map seems like a recipe for boredom for late era teamers. That's a map designed for CTON play IMO.
Again, I don't blame the game designers(I would have agreed with most of those ideas as well)and maybe it just takes some more getting used to. I'll probably play many more before all is said and done. My opinion may change in the future.
|
|
|
Post by churchill1 on May 10, 2006 5:16:57 GMT -5
wow necrom, my heart skipped a beat when i read ur post. there is so much truth here it is unreal. and mister dusty raises some excellent points as well. i think i am getting ok at this game (as squall would say i am staring to trust myself). however this doesnt carry over to teamers at all because i havent had the chance to improve my game there. why? cos i really do not enjoy them. there are several reasons: 1. the lack of independence that necrom talks about is really, really true. unless ur the team leader, the god father that is ( and this is either the best player, or sometimes the guy with the biggest ego, and sometimes neither). the best ones btw don't have to be the best players they just have to explain what they know in a way that can be understood. not everyone has this gift. back to the point: u don't get to choose ur techs. u don't get to choose ur strategy. u don't even get to choose ur builds or ur city sites sometimes. ur just told what to do from the hand that feeds u. wheres the fun in that. 2. they are very formulaic. the norm is reni teamers. and there is a set tech path every time (with only a little variation). and u always go for cav and u always go 0% science to convert ur knights to cavs. this is BORING. every single cton i play is different. u have to think on ur feet, adapt to the situations and the best thing of all is u call all the shots. 3. which brings me to my next point. in teamers if u stuff up (or even if u don't and die) ur responsible to ur whole team. if same happens in cton i just think: "oh well, i will just win the next one. or, i learnt this, i will play differently next time." may be i have a sensitive conscience but i feel awful after i lose. 4. jerks: won't mention no names but some ppl who play civ are the j-word. and they are no fun to play with. in cton it is bearable. but in a teamer, if u are getting blamed for things unfairly or someone goes: "wtf, u have that particular unit on that particular tile, do u have a hamster for a brain or something", then it is just crappy and makes me mad. sometimes i have seriously considered just quitting a teamer i was so mad (fortunately i restrained). and ppl are cliquey and they'll only talk to each other and worst of all ppl many won't give advice. how can us teamer noobs be any good without getting some advice? don't get me wrong: there are some that do give it. 5. i seem to stuff up regularly. so may be i am naturally no good at teamers . i do listen and do take advice when i can understand that it is sound. yeah sure often u just gotta do what they say, there is no time 2 xplain. but just a bit of xplanation makes the world of difference. if i know why i have to do something i will do it for sure, and it will improve my game massively. but then on other occasions i have played well and helped my team win or even led my team (with complete newbs). so i am not sure what the deal is there. oh well. if u got this far, hats off 2 u. be interesting to hear some responses heh. well i try a teamer every now and again. and almost every time i promise myself afterward that i will never put myself through it again. oh and also it is a shame that most of the better players play only teamers. well it would be nice to not have to just play newbs and low ranked players in the cton. i am happy to lose if i get a good game.
|
|
|
Post by Avogadro on May 10, 2006 6:29:27 GMT -5
Lestat I think you misunderstood. I didnt say player "should" quit ladder. I say some either learn or quit or play ctons. But as long as we let noobs play then we increase or pool of potential veterans down the road. Play exclusively with top players and once a few of those players move on to another game then you run out of talent.
I was by no means saying players should quit ladder if they do not wish to play captian directed teamers.
|
|
|
Post by zerza on May 10, 2006 8:55:13 GMT -5
Well, I'm a fan of quite arguably the most DIFFICULT RTS to ever come out. It has more strategy in one minute of play then any RTS has in an entire session. One false move and you died. thats that. It brings me to this quote. "Stupid people are the canaries in the coal mine of life" And that game would be zerza, enquiring minds need to know? ;D Kohan2, Kings of War. Its rather unique in that you customize your companies, a leader, 4 frontline, 2 flankers, and 2 support(mages). With 6 races and 6 factions it allows for a crapload of custom companies Think of it was Warcraft3 for grown ups WC3 stole heavily from this game. Economy is all done in the cities by making buildings, so no bothering with stupid crap allowing the focus to be on war
|
|
|
Post by longhorn on May 10, 2006 9:35:15 GMT -5
Teamers are such a hard concept to qualify/quantify. I think they can be the absolute best games and most fun or they can be the most frustrating and gut wrenching experience on the planet.
Noobs, nasty veterans, bad resources, boring maps, unbalanced teams, lack of privacy have all been mentioned as possible contributory factors. And to some extent, they all are. But I think the biggest reason we have so many unhappy teamers is that most of us have forgot how to actually have fun playing the game. Whether we have internalized some misdirected mental block that says we can only have fun if we win or are in complete control, or we have evolved into a grumpy old veteran who doesn't think anyone else in worthy of playing in your presence-- somehow we need to get back to enjoying this game and just having fun.
Some concerns we obviously can't address. Like Necro, if you don't want anyone to gain knowledge from you, to see your tactics, then obviously there is nothing that can be done for your concerns.
But others concerns we can. The 'noobs' can be more willing to listen to the advice of some veteran players. Nothing is more frustrating in a teamer to me is when a noob on the front line is crying for help because hes under attack, yet that player is building a bank or an aqueduct instead of an archer or a Superman. Also, 'noobs' try and learn from your mistakes-- making mistakes is absolutely part of the learning experience, but learn from those experiences and don't make the same mistakes. If your teammate suggests to you that mining sheep might not be the best use of your resources, go ahead an listen to what he has to stay.
Veterans- be kind, be polite, be courteous. Realize that your way is not the only way to do things. You may have great tactics and strategy, but that doesn't necessarily mean that the other player is wrong. Ping in emergency situations only. If a player is working a farm and you feel he should be making a cottage-- simply get over it-- or at the very least, take the time to explain why that person should be doing what you suggest. Don't beat a player up for mistakes when there is nothing that player can do about it. An example here is when a stack of axemen show up 2 tiles from a city defended by two archers and you find it necessary to ping the stack and repeatedly tell that player what an idiot he is for not build catapults. Its too late.. and no amount of pinging and berating is going to change that. A better way to handle that would be to talk to the player after the game, and give him some pointers. I recently played an ancient teamer with Germania who went so far as demanding no one place a city without his permission, he wanted to control what you produce, what tile you work, where every unit was stationed. Now I will be the first to admit I could learn a lot about ancient from Germania. But to play the way you were demanding was about as fun as a visit to the dentist. Weaksauce, you may be a decent player, heck maybe even a good one, but your constant berating and pinging and control issues make it absolutely miserable to play with you at all. Two people I would like to hold up here as examples are SirPartyMan and Tommynt. SirPartyMan is always an absolute pleasure to play with. He never yells, never treats his teammates bad and win or lose always enjoys the game. Tommynt, while very competitive, has taught me so much about the game (even though he probably doesn't think I have learned a thing) and that I have so much more to learn. Mookie, Dusty Dragoon, Willburn, Mark_Weston, are more examples of players who are just absolutely a pleasure to play with (and there are a lot more just like them).
Expand the types of games you play and the maps you play them on. Don't whine about how boring a certain map, experience it. Play fractal, shuffle, fantasy realm, even highlands and great plains. Try a larger map where you don't start with 3 squares from each other. Try a modern, try a future, try a medieval, or an industrial. Try having raging barbs, no city razing, one-city challenges, maybe even an always peace game. Has anyone tried a 5v5 always peace game?
Increase the amount of teamers playing with people you actually enjoy playing with. Have pick up clan matches or start a 5v5 and invite a team of 5 to come and challenge yours. Do not do the (for example) X Clan vs game and put the next 5 random people who show up in a room against you.. let your challengers select their own team to match against you.
And finally, try to be a little kinder or nicer to other players. Invite someone new to play in your games on occasion. Don't hold a grudge ( I am guilty of that one big time) let things go. Be a good sport. That includes things like actually finishing a game, and not demanding that your opponent surrender. Don't even ask the other team if they 'want' to concede.. any concession talk should solely be brought up by the team who wants to concede. Learn to live with the settings, don't demand someone hit enter and likewise be conscious of pressing enter after you are through with your turn. Request permission before pausing a game, and explain why if you must.
But again, more than anything else, try and have fun!
thanks
|
|
|
Post by GERMANIA on May 10, 2006 10:22:08 GMT -5
Well sorry to hear that i control you abit to much, but the problem on a anc game specially on TBG is that your starting place is deciding almost your hole game if you plant wrong game is done, it doesn't care how good you are since 1,61!!
So at this way ( maybe abit to hard way) you learn fast why you do that and see how fast you can grow and still play save and control the other players
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on May 10, 2006 12:14:13 GMT -5
Personally, I tend to avoid ctons like the plague because they are played, for the most part, on ancient, and I can't stand ancient. On Inland Sea, which I see most ctons are played, the player who starts with copper or horse in his or her capital has a huge advantage, and the player who starts with iron can at least survive. A lot of people I play teamers with feel the same, but I know a lot of players enjoy ancient more than anything else, so to each his own . As for me, I'd like to see more medieval and later ctons, where you can see all resources and get 2 settlers so you can find a key strategic resource if you are denied it around your capital ... that is a more fun game for me. If it absolutely HAS to be an ancient game, how about playing on Wheel? I played quite a few Wheel games hosted by SPM and I remember being a bit farther apart than on Inland ... so if you don't have a resource at least you're not going to have 6 axes or 6 chariots on you right away making sure you don't one.
|
|
|
Post by MookieNJ on May 10, 2006 12:30:35 GMT -5
As for playing teamers with newer players, I know that we absolutely have to. If we don't, eventually we will have no one to play with but a handful of people and we will be lucky to all be online at the same time.
As for teaching newer players the basics of teamers, as long as they have a will to listen and adapt their game to new tactics, they will be fine. However, in a teamer is not the easiest time to teach. If you've got 6 cities, 10 workers, a few caravels on the sea, and a bunch of units to move around, you're not going to have a lot of time to examine what a new player is doing, correct a flaw or two politely and explain why he or she needs to do something differently.
Perhaps, along with Tommy's excellent ancient strategy guide he posted to the forums, some of the more experience Ren Teamer players should write a few articles? We could give some of the new players interested in playing teamers a heads up on common strategies, civics, builds, worker actions, etc. so they are better prepared going into a game.
|
|
|
Post by knupp on May 10, 2006 15:24:03 GMT -5
Are you serious? If you think only 30 people are good at this game you are seriously mistaken. Let me guess, you are one of these elite players? From this post I'm 99% that you are not involved in any SP communities. Everybody has their strengths and weaknesses and not everybody plays in the ladder or even MP for that matter. Check out some other Civ4 sites where sp tournaments are played, succesion games, and lots of other things. Maybe then you will notice that there are a lot more than 30 out of a million people that are good at this game. I make plenty of mistakes in teamer games. Hasn't everyone from time to time? I personally like to play games with teammates who will point out the mistakes made and what they would have done instead. Other people who constantly ping and complain about noobs, demeaning that player in front of everybody in the game are the people I try to avoid. If you don't want noobs to make stupid mistakes try to help them out to improve their game, don't yell at them when they are not even sure what they have done wrong. Qutting teamer games just because you might lose a teamer because of a noob isn't really the solution. Helping out the newer players and coaching them so they can become better players is. I hate to see people complain about noobs when they are not willing to help those noobs become better. Just my 2 cents.
|
|
|
Post by Elledge on May 10, 2006 15:48:32 GMT -5
I didn't come from Civ3, so I might not have as broad a perspective on this, but it comes up all the time and I am completely in the dark.
Why do people dislike having the whole board visible to allies? I love it in every way. I like having other people able to watch me and criticize my play, and I love being able to watch other people. Those two things have been responsible for a great deal of my personal improvement. Plus, it gives you a much, much better strategic vision of the game; you know what reinforcements you are getting, where to send your great scientist, how much production the front line is capable of, who has extra resources to request, etc, etc, etc. It seems entirely invaluable and I can't think of a single reason I would want only limited vision.
I'm sure there's a flipside to this, because a lot of people seem to disagree, but I honestly don't see it. Can anyone explain?
|
|