[Retribution]

coming down to the same thing, your penalizing the better team, because their better, just cuz you suck dosen't mean we have to care, if you don't like the fact someone or some team is better then you, GET BETTER!!!

[nerverot]

coming down to the same thing, your penalizing the better team, because their better, just cuz you suck dosen't mean we have to care, if you don't like the fact someone or some team is better then you, GET BETTER!!!

Ha ha. I can never tell if you argue because you like to or really disagree.

He's not suggesting penalizing the better team. He's suggesting penalizing a STACKED team. But really it's a point modifier, not a penalty.

I like to play with my friends when I'm on. And sometimes that means we all end up on the same team and run over the less experienced team. We'd still be able to do this with his suggested changes, but the poor souls that have to work against us get their points slightly adjusted to reflect the imbalance.

Sounds simple enough.

*cough*

And I don't think stacked (whether on purpose or not) teams mean the other team sucks. Just that they have fewer experienced players.

You should never forget the time *you've* ended up on that team and had to work twice as hard for half (or less) the results. Getting rewarded for supporting the game seems both fair and logical.

[-LMA-]

coming down to the same thing, your penalizing the better team, because their better, just cuz you suck dosen't mean we have to care, if you don't like the fact someone or some team is better then you, GET BETTER!!!

lol, your clearly not gettin it man. He's talking about the stacking. You can't have Balls on one team and nothing but n00bs and TB, Anom, riposte and gnaw on the opposite team and suggest that's fair. You're making it sound like, GET BETTER THEN, when it's not that you can't win due to not playing good, but Team Stacking, so there should be a level of fairness yes. Good thing there is Auto Balance sometimes, but sometimes it's still not enough.

[paw]

Nerverot, I admire you for being able to laugh at him. I find it utterly frustrating, because he's not trolling, he actually thinks he's being clever.

[Retribution]

and tell me what effect your change will really have, the same stat whores, and the best players who actually look at the stats will be the only ones noticing the change, and then they will only play the team where they will do the best, sure the same team won't be stacked, the other team will just be stacked more
you know i really hate when people call the better team stacked, so what there better then you GET OVER IT, theres always gona be a better team, thats why theres a friggin score board, its not like we automatically pick the wining team hell when i'm doing good i prefer to play the lesser of the two teams for the challenge of trying to get them to win, its fun, its honorable
i mean Jesus you complain about the most insignificant things, i mean what does it really matter one team wins more then the other, its not like the winning team gets paid?

[nerverot]

you know i really hate when people call the better team stacked, so what there better then you GET OVER IT

You probably aren't better then me, but regardless on a server there are 3 fundamental things: 1) players (we like sourceop players, right?) 2) teams (good players make good teams) 3) games (good players and good teams make good games).

If a server lacks any of those things everyone suffers.

Lets pretend for a second that your world existed: playing on a team with better players means you're a better play.

If that's true then the converse is also true: players on weaker teams are weaker players.

Now if we follow that logic, when you choose a team you can chose team A) and become a better player or chose team B) and become a weaker player.

Don't you see some kind of logical fallacy here? Skill is a player attribute, not actually a team attribute. Shifting the 'skill' to one team or the other simply shifts the balance of the game but it doesn't change the skill of the individual player.

I guess understanding this is what I consider the difference between a good player and a player. I get better by playing better, more balanced games.

*cough*

That's not to say I don't enjoy the advantages from time to time, just that I understand the advantage isn't exactly a direct reflection on me (or that sometimes it is, just not a FLATTERING reflection).

[Retribution]

i never said playing on a week team makes you a weak player, you are puting words in my mouth only difference between the good players and the bad is how hard they try, i'm saying you should get penalized just because your team tryes harder, i mean what kind of message are we sending to the kids here

[nerverot]

i mean what kind of message are we sending to the kids here

Judging from your response, obviously it's confusing them.

*drum beat*

Ok, stupid joke aside. If a good player can play on a weaker team (I think 'works harder' can be a kind of fallacy that presupposes an flat skill level) then that player is currently being penalized for supporting a team with fewer highly skilled players. And the group of skilled players is being rewarded not for working hard, but for having numbers on their side.

Which is kind of the key to the use of terms like stacking. Which I'm sure all of us have contributed from time to time. If you check a roster before you join and choose a team because the other team is fucked (or the team you want is good) you know what I mean. And we've all done it.

[Fides]

I'd rather there be some voting sort of thing that completely randomizes the teams, or something.

[boelter]

Sometimes I think Ret's points are just lost on people because of how he argues. Then again, the more he argues the more I wonder if I was the one misinterpreting his point. Paw's idea is a good one, but in the long run I think the effect on stacking will be negligible. However, when a team just gets steamrolled they aren't completely slaughtered in stats. That isn't a bad thing, as long as there is a pretty drastic cutoff before it goes into effect. I don't see any point in handing out handicaps because a player that is completely unwilling to switch teams because they're going to lose ground in their personal stats probably won't help the other team out that much anyway. Loosing less points also isn't much of an incentive for the less skilled team either, because it takes a team effort to pull off the upset, and loosing less points won't stop players from half-assing it because they feel like the teams are 'stacked.'

So I think it's an interesting idea, and it wouldn't do any harm, but I just don't think it would cause a serious change.