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

[Joodoo]

it'll be fun for freestyle games

[Timminz]

it'll be fun for freestyle games

For freestyle, I guess there would have to be some way to switch between colours. I would suggest either clicking on the "names" to the right of the map, or having an extra drop-down menu to the left of the others. Personally, I'd only play sequential, but I only play sequential for everything else too.

[AAFitz]

it'll be fun for freestyle games

actually It would create a reverse multi situation

you could have someone else play your account at the same time and play the part of the partner to speed things up...lol

instead of one guy playing two, youd have two playing one.

[karelpietertje]

doesn't playing with two ppl on one account in the same game screw up the map or something?
I really, really, REALLY want to play a speed single-player quadruple freestyle game on Waterloo with unlimited fortifications.
Does anybody want to play those settings against me as soon as it becomes an option ?

[Timminz]

doesn't playing with two ppl on one account in the same game screw up the map or something?

No. Currently 2 people can log in to the same account, and play the same turn at the same time. It seems to me that it would be easy to fix this loophole if this suggestion were implemented. All they have to do is make it so that only one IP can be logged into an account at a time. Really, I think this should be done anyway. I'm not aware of it being a problem yet, but in a freestyle speed I could see 2 people using one account being a fair bit of an advantage. Especially on larger maps.

[THE ARMY]

i like this, very interesting, but i would have to say that i would prob be wicked awesome at it since my quads and trips teams now, with me as leading officer, basically run the show anyway.

[oVo]

I do believe if this became an option I would play it a lot and likely renew my premium
just to have some extra games going. As a current freemium things have been a bit
slow, so I just joined my first 1v1 game in a long while. True to form it's only round 2
and I'm already chasing the opposition who got first go and with a nice drop...
a few extra bonus armies as well.

[ahunda]

Yes. It´s a great suggestion, and it gets lots of support. See also here:

viewtopic.php?f=4&t=44540
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=1606&p=1519566&#p1519566

Unfortunately no response from lack & CC team ...

[ahunda]

*Bump*

As seen in the recent discussion about "the next big update" (viewtopic.php?f=6&t=94711), this is one of the most popular suggestions at the site.

Any chance to at least get some official feedback ? Is this even considered as a possible update in the (near) future ?

[jpcloet]

Hopefully Sully comments on this one. I think it is the best (non-correction) new idea that would most broadly positively impact the site. Would defintely bring 1v1 and tournaments some new ideas. Would love to see a 1v1 scoreboard to go with it or a ladder system.

[ahunda]

Pity ...

[TotoroHat]

I could be completely off here but why do we not allow freestyle in which you get to play as all four of your men at the same time but simply force you to start with the one on top and move down towards the one at the bottom... or make it so that you can choose which color you want to attack with. first, second, third, fourth.

[wolfpack0530]

I could be completely off here but why do we not allow freestyle in which you get to play as all four of your men at the same time but simply force you to start with the one on top and move down towards the one at the bottom... or make it so that you can choose which color you want to attack with. first, second, third, fourth.

I say, get it implemented first as seq. only. work out the bugs. see how it plays with a large sample size. determine the popularity of this option, then expand it to freestyle if there is a following.

For the record. I refuse to play 1v1. all luck drop and dice! With this option, i would actually consider 1v1 with my own team

[ahunda]

Concise description:

• Add a new game option, that allows 1 player to control entire Dubs, Trips or Quad teams (e.g. ahunda, ahunda, ahunda as a Trips "team").

Specifics:

• Pretty self-explanatory.

This will improve the following aspects of the site:

• Adding a 1v1 option, that is not so heavily dependent on luck as the current 1v1 games, where first turn advantage, drop & dice often decide the game within the first 2 rounds.
• Opening a whole new world of opportunities in the tournament area & of 1v1 challenges.
• Giving new players the chance to try & learn team game strategy without the frustration of mis-communication, disagreements & dead-beats, that happen regularly in random teams.

Discussion / clarification:

• 1vteam ?
  My original intention/suggestion was for a pure 1v1 team game option, separate from regular team games. Since I failed to specify that, a debate started in this thread, if 1 player would/should then be able to play alone against regular teams too.
  As suggested by a Mod, I then started a 2nd poll on this point. Whilst there had been a lot of support & a clear majority in the first poll on the 1v1 team game option itself (79% in favour), opinions were split rather evenly on the 1vteam option (51% in favour). Quite a few members explicitly stated, that they support the suggestion of 1v1 team games, but reject the 1vteam option.
  Considering the results of this poll & the discussion in the thread: If the 1vteam option would be allowed, players would need to have the option to choose upon game creation pure team v team games (excluding a single player from joining all spots on the other team).
• Impact on regular team games
  One of the major concerns of those, who rejected the 1v1 team game idea in general, was the impact this new game option could have on regular team games: The fear, that many players would choose this new option over regular team games. Thus a decline in team games and the community building aspect of them. Consequently a negative impact on the site & community in general.
  Those supporting the 1v1 team game option did not share that concern: Since this new option would not be able to replace the social aspect of team games, that many members value so high, its impact on regular team games should be negligible. It should rather be seen in competition with the regular 1v1 games than with team games. It was even suggested, that this new game option might actually attract & introduce new players to team games, since they wouldn´t need to first find reliable partners, but could learn team game strategy in the 1v1 team games & even meet possible partners there.
• Farming issues
  Concerns were raised repeatedly about a supposed farming potential of this game option. Having read the entire thread again just now to summarise the discussion, I however couldn´t find a single post, that specified said farming potential, or why it should be a great concern in this particular game option when compared to others, for example Freestyle 1v1 or Freestyle team games (the existing game options, where farming mostly takes place today).
  Repeated counter-arguments here were: The potential of abuse by a few should not be reason enough to reject a game option, that could be enjoyed by many (just as Freestyle 1v1 or Freestyle team games). And: In this 1v1 team game option a high ranked player would always put his own points on the line, whilst today quite a few high ranked players are known to team with low ranked players in regular team games, who follow their directions on every turn. Basically 1 player controlling the entire team already, but risking even fewer points in the process.
• Freestyle
  The original suggestion included the note, that this "would probably not work with Freestyle" and should be a Sequential option only. During the discussion in the thread however, some suggestions were made how it could work in Freestyle, for example by allowing a player to switch between his colours with one fast click, or giving him control over all his colours simultaneously.
  Concerns were raised about farming issues, that might be greater in Freestyle than in Sequential, and about coding issues. Whilst the implementation of Sequential 1v1 team games seems rather easy (code for regular team games needing only slight modifications), a Freestyle version would require more work.
• Medals
  Some members suggested to not count 1v1 team games for team medals, because a) they simply are no team games, b) this could limit a possible negative impact on regular team games.
  No agreement was reached, what medal the 1v1 team games could count for. It was suggested, that maybe a new 1v1 medal could be created.

Poll Results:

• First poll: Would you like to see this (1v1 team games) implemented ?
  
  137 votes in total
  108 (79%) in favour
  29 (21%) against
  
  [bigimg]http://img526.imageshack.us/img526/296/1v1poll.jpg[/bigimg]
  
• Second poll (as suggested by a Suggestions Mod): If 1v1 team games were implemented, should 1vteam be included / allowed ?
  
  144 votes in total
  74 (51%) in favour
  70 (49%) against
  
  [bigimg]http://img231.imageshack.us/img231/5061/1vteam.jpg[/bigimg]

I know, that this has been suggested before, and it had a lot of support. I know, that many players would love to see this implemented. But there has never been any feedback whatsoever from lack or CC staff, if this has actually even been considered. So I am hoping to get that at least: A little feedback.

I personally can imagine so many great options through this up-date:

A 1v1 option for high ranked & competitive players, who don´t currently play 1v1, because those games are simply down to luck.

A real option for 1v1 challenges (player A challenging player B for a series of 4 1v1 Dubs, 4 1v1 Trips, 4 1v1 Quads, or whatever).

Great new options for tournaments.

And I imagine, it would be rather easy to implement too, as the code for team games is already in place & would need only slight modifications to make this work.

[Dako]

It's been suggested already and will be more fun to play. Because, well, it is less random than normal 1v1 game and it is much more fun to play.

So, yeah, I vote for this. I would like to see how team pro's can play the game alone.

[Blitzaholic]

Agreed, this has been suggested and not sure exactly where they went with it, but, I think it is a great addition to the site.

[khazalid]

sorry henner.

big NO from me. this will kill regular team games dead.

[freakns]

it wouldve been awesome. i think a lot of people are waiting for this to happen. completely supporting

[Hopscotcher]

To put it bluntly.................

This is possibly the worst Idea I have ever heard.

[ahunda]

sorry henner.

big NO from me. this will kill regular team games dead.

Well. I have been considering this too. But I doubt, it is true.

Regular team games would still hold their own appeal. The social inter-action of playing with friends & meeting new people. The entire clan action, that is surrounding the regular team games, etc.

I for one would certainly continue to play regular team games.

But as stated in my first post, I could understand the attitude of team games being supposed to be team games. If this were the officially stated stance of the site, fine. At least it would be an official stance, and I´d give up hoping then ...

[chephren]

Good option. Completely disagree that it will kill team games....that's one of the greatest pleasures on this site, playing in a team that really clicks...it will just be a better addition to the 1v1 concept which I never play because it relies too much on drop & first turn. A Trips game with only 2 players is not really a Trips game - it's a 1v1 game with your armies split into 3 sections.

[agonzos]

sorry henner.

big NO from me. this will kill regular team games dead.

I think ahunda's idea is very good and worth implementing. I think Khazalid's concern might be addressed if we limit it to only dubs games and leave trips and quads alone. This will help with the luck factor in 1v1 games, while at the same time seeing if it really does have an adverse effect on team dubs games.

Also, I don't think team games will be in danger too much anyway. Players choose team games not just for the decrease in the luck factor, but also because it is fun and instructive to play with other players and to discuss strategy. That won't go away with this new option.

Still, I think limiting this change to dubs games might be a good first step.

[Gold Knight]

sorry henner.

big NO from me. this will kill regular team games dead.

Completely agree with Khaz, it would completely isolate players on this site. The game as it is actually makes people work together and use communication skills to win games. Ive also been through games where a teammate has cost me the game, but have also had several games where my teammate had saved my ass with a move i would have never thought to make.

Also, think how long the game would take if you played against a deadbeat... Dont really see a need for this. I enjoy the interaction with other players on the site.

[chephren]

sorry henner.

big NO from me. this will kill regular team games dead.

Completely agree with Khaz, it would completely isolate players on this site. The game as it is actually makes people work together and use communication skills to win games. Ive also been through games where a teammate has cost me the game, but have also had several games where my teammate had saved my ass with a move i would have never thought to make.

Also, think how long the game would take if you played against a deadbeat... Dont really see a need for this. I enjoy the interaction with other players on the site.

I think people are looking at this in the wrong way. Think of it not as a "team" game but as a 1v1 option. It would only ever be allowed in clan wars as a 1v1 option anyway, and would never replace the usual Team Dubs, Trips & Quads.

[Hopscotcher]

sorry henner.

big NO from me. this will kill regular team games dead.

Completely agree with Khaz, it would completely isolate players on this site. The game as it is actually makes people work together and use communication skills to win games. Ive also been through games where a teammate has cost me the game, but have also had several games where my teammate had saved my ass with a move i would have never thought to make.

Also, think how long the game would take if you played against a deadbeat... Dont really see a need for this. I enjoy the interaction with other players on the site.

I think people are looking at this in the wrong way. Think of it not as a "team" game but as a 1v1 option. It would only ever be allowed in clan wars as a 1v1 option anyway, and would never replace the usual Team Dubs, Trips & Quads.

If I want to play by myself, I'll go sit in a corner. 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.