Teams...

[tom00117]

There should be a rule for maximum number in one team. imo

 

[iHaxors/Jess]

First people, lets take a quick look at this thread. http://www.minecraftsurvivalgames.com/threads/no-no-suggestions-updated-read-before-posting.32625/ This is the thread for no no suggestions. If you look at the very last one, this type of idea is on there. This has been requested time and time again, it will never be implemented as it shouldn't be. Also, have to be " that guy " but this is also in the wrong section. At least it would seem its in the wrong section. This is more of a suggestion than anything.

This has nothing to do to make teams end, its just a limit on how big your team can be.
Teams of 4 and under are fun to take out but it all depends on gear.

 

[sfgiantsfan1]

First off it would be incredibly hard to police such a restriction, also teams are a challenge and make the game more exciting! If you are struggling to kill teams, as they all say "fns is your friend". Teams of 4+ are extremely rare and when they come along you just have to try to deal with them. Lastly if you want to fully propose this please ask a mod to move the thread here.

Have a nice day!

Hive does it.

 

[CandyCranium]

In the Hunger Games movie, the District 1 and 2 people and Peeta teamed up.

 

[Joel/MadDawg]

How often do you see teams of 4+? You kinda sound like you're exaggerating the problem, because in my 2000 games of Mcsg I only recall facing a few teams of more than 4.

 

[G33ke]

...What defines a team though?

When playing solo, I quite frequently make unsaid truces. We're not teamed, but we are temporarily not attacking each other, in close range, focusing our efforts on one guy...Why? Because we both have a full understand that we'll both die if we don't work together for a short moment in time. Imagine the situation again when I'm teamed with people, however I got separated. Is that short moment of time where I truce with a random guy going to count towards my total team number? If so, what's considered me teaming with him? Is it me not attacking him within melee range? What if I didn't see him? Just me looking in his direction is by no means proof that I saw him, I may have glanced over him. What about deathmatch? It's often in deathmatch that one person is under the fire of both of the others, because everyone at this point understands that attacking in a perfect triangle is stupid. Are these two people teaming or not?

Imagine Tomahawk or another youtuber playing in a game with a friend or two. Suddenly, a few fans come along and don't attack him - they want to team with him. What if he's low on health? He would get killed for attacking. And if he doesn't attack? It's a team of 4+ has been formed...except it hasn't.
They never said they were teaming, neither party indicated they were, etc. They just merely both see harm in attacking each other. There are plenty of instances in games where both me and my target (usually among better players) lack full understanding of what the other player has in their arsenal, and don't want to jump into combat right away. It's not uncommon for us to stay fairly close to one another (not within melee range, though) and mess around for a bit while we wait for the other to make the first move. It's not smart for either of us to make the first move, so...we wait. We aren't teamed, we merely see harm to ourselves in initiating an attack, but see reason to stay close to each other.

What about people bypassing the system? 6 people want to team, so they go into two separate parties of 3 people and go to opposite ends of the map. They make sure to avoid meeting each other by describing their location at all times. If on accident they meet each other, they merely pretend to attack each other and run off. No harm done here, right? No, actually, harm is done. They may still plan times to meet to finish off a player, drop stuff in chests for the other party to collect later, and of course, never attack each other. With each party of 3 alive and one other player, this player cannot hope for them to attack each other - they never will. He has to fight them all at some point, or else die.


A system like this is severely flawed. I've merely touched on the misunderstandings and bypasses to the system there is. And honestly, is this rule needed? Not really... Large teams aren't all that common, and when they do happen? Oh well. Honestly, I win more often solo than on teams, (And by win, I mean make it to the point in the game where it's merely me and my teammates, not actually beating my teammates.) and I personally do not have a hard time winning either way. Certainly, large teams of good players aren't easy to take out by any means, but there are far worse things that are "unfair" the staff have to worry about, like hacking, game balance and fixing server problems like, as merely an example, NCP pulling you back for 1.7 sprint. Teams are perfectly fair, no matter how large. Honestly, even if it's an impossible one, it's a welcome challenge for me nonetheless. It's a game that's meant to be filled with luck elements anyway, and teams are no different from how "stacked" someone is at any particular point in a game.

 

[TimmaaaaH]

There could be a plugin that checks if there are 4+ people within close proximity of each other. If they are not damaging each other for a period of time, the players will be kicked/banned.

That's how you could enforce it.

That would probably not work but more importantly its not worth the developers' time to develope such a plugin since this isn't really something that NEEDS to be solved.
Also I would like to point out that killing 3+ is far from impossible if you're a good pvp'er and if you're not well then fighting these teamd will still be an excellent moment for you to become a better player. And also, people should really try seeing stuff like this as what it really is, which is a challenge instead of seeing it as an obstackle.

 

[4non]

Clans would be pretty pointless..

 

[SixZoSeven]

We do not confine our players to rules regarding how many people they can play with.
In the end, there is only one winner.

 

[BlitzCometITU]

There should be a rule about no teams higher than 5 members. If its a clan there shall be an exception.

Then people would make clans sorely to have big teams. The rules about teams should just stay untouched.

 

[Fox]

Then people would make clans sorely to have big teams. The rules about teams should just stay untouched.

was thinking about that

 

[gianteye123]

How about the clan battles? you see 6v6s and 8v8s