|
Teamers
Jun 21, 2006 23:38:10 GMT -5
Post by ironclad on Jun 21, 2006 23:38:10 GMT -5
Think they should be heavily enforced as it was in the past. - Once teams are set it is final - Picking order for 4v4 1-2-2-1-1-2 - Picking order for 5v5 1-2-2-1-1-2-1-2 - Picking order for 6v6 1-2-2-1-1-2-2-1-2 - 2nd cap gets to choose Elrad Or Pick. If he chooses Elrad, he will Elrad it, and once the team is picked it is FINAL. - Elrad tends to take forever because of all the whining, so better off picking, unless the team made is Final. -Some teamers take over an hr to start so I think we should have clearer guidelines, didnt check the rules btw, geussing its not in there . -This is what I find was best when playing, people who have better ideas post' em Hopefully the days of 1 hr staging will be over wohoooo!!!
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 0:10:47 GMT -5
Post by MookieNJ on Jun 22, 2006 0:10:47 GMT -5
- Once teams are set it is final I think everyone should get a 1 time chance to walk immediately after teams are picked -- if one of the captains just does a bad job picking or elrading, the game can be kind of screwed ... Funny thing here is, every game is different on who gets the last pick. Some people say captain 1, some people say captain 2, and some people say whichever team they are on doesn't get the last pick. Most games I have played in it was the other way around -- first captain chooses pick or elrad, then second captain elrads if that was the choice, then first captain gets his choice of the two teams. If the second captain makes a horrible elrad, I think it needs to be changed. Who wants to play on an obviously weaker team? That's why I'd rather just pick all the time ... no elrading, no negotiation, just get the game started . In the end, if I am elrading I just pretend I am captain 1 and captain 2 and pick the teams ... is it really going to be that different from picking? I think the problem here was ... how should captains be determined? Usually we just do 2 highest rank and get the game rolling. I know I have captained many times against far superior opponents ... is it fair? I dunno, but you earned your rank one way or the other, so suck it up! Sometimes another player in the game will volunteer to captain if someone is underqualified (new player, doesn't know everyone, or whatever) ... I see no problem with this, but I don't think it should be forced upon someone who doesn't want to captain, it should be strictly volunteer. In the end, I can't believe I wasted 2 hours of my life today listening to people whine and complain about teams. Just do traditional pick order and go. Thank god GameSpy was mostly kind to us today, or it would have been super insanity.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 0:36:47 GMT -5
Post by Ellestar on Jun 22, 2006 0:36:47 GMT -5
- Once teams are set it is final - Picking order for 4v4 1-2-2-1-1-2 - Picking order for 5v5 1-2-2-1-1-2-1-2 - Picking order for 6v6 1-2-2-1-1-2-2-1-2 Hmm by default 1st captain gets first and last pick. That way, teams will be more fair on average (or at least less unfair on average). In your case 1st captain gets 1st pick and 2nd captain gets last one. But anyway, fairness of it depends on who's in the game (see below). - 2nd cap gets to choose Elrad Or Pick. If he chooses Elrad, he will Elrad it, and once the team is picked it is FINAL. Well, generally elrads are more fair than picking if 2nd captain knows other player's skill. Say, if there are 2 captains, 1 player who is better than others, 4 good players and 3 newbies then 1st team gets 1 very good player, 2 good players and 1 newbie vs 2 good and 2 newbies in team 2. Such things rarely happen with elrads because in elrad it will probably be 1 very good 1 good 2 newbie vs 3 good 1 newbie which is significantly less unbalanced. - Elrad tends to take forever because of all the whining, so better off picking, unless the team made is Final. IMHO amount of whining is about equal
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 1:01:21 GMT -5
Post by MookieNJ on Jun 22, 2006 1:01:21 GMT -5
- Elrad tends to take forever because of all the whining, so better off picking, unless the team made is Final. IMHO amount of whining is about equal To be fair, today the amount of whining was equal, and was the maximum, for about 2 hours.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 1:06:15 GMT -5
Post by Ellestar on Jun 22, 2006 1:06:15 GMT -5
Most games I have played in it was the other way around -- first captain chooses pick or elrad, then second captain elrads if that was the choice, then first captain gets his choice of the two teams. Germania said several times that 2nd player should choose pick or elrad. And several other veteran players agreed with him. I think the problem here was ... how should captains be determined? Usually we just do 2 highest rank and get the game rolling. I know I have captained many times against far superior opponents ... is it fair? I dunno, but you earned your rank one way or the other, so suck it up! Sometimes another player in the game will volunteer to captain if someone is underqualified (new player, doesn't know everyone, or whatever) ... I see no problem with this, but I don't think it should be forced upon someone who doesn't want to captain, it should be strictly volunteer. IMHO the only case when two highest ranked players MUST be captains is when they're one rank between each other. In that case, it's a rank match. Being a captain when you're one of the 2 highest ranked players when other captain is better? Of course, it's fair between captains but it may be unfair for other players in a teamer.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 3:00:06 GMT -5
Post by Ellestar on Jun 22, 2006 3:00:06 GMT -5
- Once teams are set it is final Good idea, but who follows it anyway? Say, yesterday it was really g ay. 4v4 Teamer, i say i maybe let's stay that way, i don't want to play 5v5. Knupp (host, 1st captain) says "yes, we'll stay at 4v4". I say "maybe elrad"? Ironclad says no, no elrad, and Knupp agrees as i understand. So we pick, Jonneyboy says teams are unfair, and Knupp opens 2 more slots. I mean, WTF? We already picked teams and he said himself that we'll not play 5v5... Twice i said "why 5v5, we agreed for 4v4?". No responce. Ok, since i said i don't want 5v5 i quit (generally i'm always doing what i previously said i'll do and i clearly stated i don't want 5v5), then Germania quits as well and you play 4v4 teamer as previously planned but without me. I say, it was a nice way to effectively kick me from a teamer after your team was unhappy with teams and after your own team decided to pick instead of elrad... I guess Knupp didn't like teams as well because he opened slots after teams were picked.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 4:19:58 GMT -5
Post by tommynt on Jun 22, 2006 4:19:58 GMT -5
bleh, looks like i gotta play bit more again to babysit u guys ok thats how it s done: if 2 guys are happy to be caps let em be, if not caps are 2 highest ranked 2nd cap choose to do elrad or not - if he choose to elrad he make teams right away - if he chose to pick 1. cap picks 1 guy 2-2 12 3-3 1221 4-4 122121 5-5 12211221 6-6 1221122121 1. pick should get last pick or there ll be too much whinning, i d still favour the good ol 12121212 civ3 system but whinnin made it imposible if there s 1 guy who pretends that caps are dumb and not able to make good team just let him be 2nd cap once teams are starting to be made host should only let new players in if 5 out of 8 scream YES DO IT, GET TOMMY and the 3 others are afk as soon as 1 or 2 say we agreed on 4-4 now lets start it should stay 4-4 once teams are picked get civs FAST and click in - once u r clicked in, your time to go afk is come - just stay till u r clicked in and be back once game is started
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 4:36:41 GMT -5
Post by churchill1 on Jun 22, 2006 4:36:41 GMT -5
This is some nice sound advice from grandfather Tommy. Let's pay heed. Seriously, what you say makes sense.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 4:39:23 GMT -5
Post by Ellestar on Jun 22, 2006 4:39:23 GMT -5
if there s 1 guy who pretends that caps are dumb and not able to make good team just let him be 2nd cap LOL nice suggestion ;D I think it's the best rule in this thread ;D
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 4:42:23 GMT -5
Post by notagoodname on Jun 22, 2006 4:42:23 GMT -5
- Picking order for 4v4 1-2-2-1-1-2 - Picking order for 5v5 1-2-2-1-1-2-1-2 - Picking order for 6v6 1-2-2-1-1-2-2-1-2 They don't work 2-2 12 3-3 1221 4-4 122121 5-5 12211221 6-6 1221122121 They don't work either There are 2 captains and 4 picks in a 3v3 so 3-3 is 2 captains then 1-2-1 4-4 is 2 captains then 1-2-1-1-1 5-5 is 2 captains then 1-2-2-2-1 6-6 is 2 captains then 1-2-2-1-1-2-1 This gives the first pick the last pick to the first captain.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 4:46:42 GMT -5
Post by churchill1 on Jun 22, 2006 4:46:42 GMT -5
Well it doesnt matter how u come up with ur teams, as long as their balanced. But can everyone agree that they're balanced (esp. when there are 12 guys in the room)? No, of course not.
Some people need to be a bit more reasonable and say, ok this is about as fair teams as we're gonna get. Let's launch and enjoy playing CIV.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 4:52:28 GMT -5
Post by GERMANIA on Jun 22, 2006 4:52:28 GMT -5
to make it short in all games first cap should have last pick only not in a 4vs4, there it would be a bit to unbalance
so: 2-2 12 3-3 1221 4-4 122112 5-5 12211221 6-6 1221122121
Thats how the picking is
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 4:57:07 GMT -5
Post by Ellestar on Jun 22, 2006 4:57:07 GMT -5
There are 2 captains and 4 picks in a 3v3 so 3-3 is 2 captains then 1-2-1 4-4 is 2 captains then 1-2-1-1-1 5-5 is 2 captains then 1-2-2-2-1 6-6 is 2 captains then 1-2-2-1-1-2-1 This gives the first pick the last pick to the first captain. Actually, in the examples above your post last number means who gets last player (without picking). Also, in your example 2nd captain gets last player (opposite to what you said). Besides, i don't see 4v4, i see only 3v5 in your example LOOOL. I suggest you to double-check what are you writing.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 5:09:27 GMT -5
Post by churchill1 on Jun 22, 2006 5:09:27 GMT -5
I suggest you to double-check what are you writing. Touche ;D
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 5:13:19 GMT -5
Post by Ellestar on Jun 22, 2006 5:13:19 GMT -5
Well it doesnt matter how u come up with ur teams, as long as their balanced. But can everyone agree that they're balanced (esp. when there are 12 guys in the room)? No, of course not. Some people need to be a bit more reasonable and say, ok this is about as fair teams as we're gonna get. Let's launch and enjoy playing CIV. I prefer to say "ok teams are unbalanced but let's play anyway" ;D
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 5:20:16 GMT -5
Post by Elledge on Jun 22, 2006 5:20:16 GMT -5
Here's the only really fair way to pick teams.
Every player in the room needs to provide a scaled estimate of the quality of every other player. The host can record this on a handy legal pad, or perhaps in Excel. Call the perceived quality of player B by player A (A's judgment of B) QAB. For each player X, take the average Q`X of QAX, QBX, QCX, et al, discarding the high and low value extremes to eliminate players who have a decidedly inaccurate perception of their quality. This average is hereforth referred to as the player's strength and represents the generally agreed quality of the player within the game setting. Now for each player P take the root mean square RP of the set of his or her perceived qualities QPX for each opposing player X. This is an effective measure of P's reliability at gauging the strength of the other players in the room. The captains are selected as the two players P with the lowest values RP. The primary captain is defined as the player with the lowest R-value; the secondary captain has the second lowest R-value. Each captain follows a standard picking order as described above by Ironclad, with the caveat that the players they pick are determined objectively by their perceived quality as relative to the captain. For each pick, the captain (call him player A) moves down the list of players and selects the player P with the highest value QAP who has not yet been picked to join the team. Picks continue until all players are chosen.
This method is transparent, reliable, and it will make Gogf stop whining so much.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 6:02:27 GMT -5
Post by churchill1 on Jun 22, 2006 6:02:27 GMT -5
God forbid someone should host without having a legal pad to hand.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 6:03:27 GMT -5
Post by Ellestar on Jun 22, 2006 6:03:27 GMT -5
Here's the only really fair way to pick teams. Every player in the room needs to provide a scaled estimate of the quality of every other player. The host can record this on a handy legal pad, or perhaps in Excel. Call the perceived quality of player B by player A (A's judgment of B) QAB. For each player X, take the average Q`X of Q AX, Q BX, Q CX, et al, discarding the high and low value extremes to eliminate players who have a decidedly inaccurate perception of their quality. I think we should normalize QAB, QAC etc. before using it so it will be in a range of 0-1.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 6:56:26 GMT -5
Post by Elledge on Jun 22, 2006 6:56:26 GMT -5
Here's the only really fair way to pick teams. Every player in the room needs to provide a scaled estimate of the quality of every other player. The host can record this on a handy legal pad, or perhaps in Excel. Call the perceived quality of player B by player A (A's judgment of B) QAB. For each player X, take the average Q`X of Q AX, Q BX, Q CX, et al, discarding the high and low value extremes to eliminate players who have a decidedly inaccurate perception of their quality. I think we should normalize QAB, QAC etc. before using it so it will be in a range of 0-1. Or 1-10, or whatever, it doesn't really matter as long as everyone is using the same scale.
|
|
|
Teamers
Jun 22, 2006 6:57:22 GMT -5
Post by churchill1 on Jun 22, 2006 6:57:22 GMT -5
I prefer to say "ok teams are unbalanced but let's play anyway" ;D Well yeah. Me too. Unless it is really horifically ubalanced I'd rather play than faff in the staging room for hours on end.
|
|