This maybe covered in the todo list 'expand team how to play". If not what would be nice is the ability to select which teams each players are in - at the moment I think it is down to the join order? But maybe an option to say team a,b,c etc when joining a game for the first time
wicked wrote:discussed and dismissed. most people set up teams beforehand and wish to stick to those teams. if you want random teams, join a random game.
I think their is a misunderstanding on my request - and maybe on what is possible.
When joining a team game as far as I can tell the only way you can tell who you are going to team with is the time you join. So to ensure a team you have to make sure both players are ready to join at the same time and are not in th emiddle of a part team build.
My suggestion is that initial create you choose the team you will join - this guarantees you get the team you want and don't have to rely on the time when you join. Once you have chosen a team its exactly the same as before.
AK_iceman wrote:This has still already been discussed and is on the list already.
"Option To Make Private Games Go Public " in the Unclassified section.
That way you can start a private team game, send the pass to your buddies, then when they join you switch the game to public for someone to join it.
That has not been discussed! I know as I made that other suggestion!
That suggestion above sorts it for the first team - not the subsequent. I'm looking at say a battle between forum regulars that I particpate in - at the moment it would be a bloody nightmare to get everyone teamed in the correct teams.
tals wrote:That has not been discussed! I know as I made that other suggestion!
That suggestion above sorts it for the first team - not the subsequent. I'm looking at say a battle between forum regulars that I particpate in - at the moment it would be a bloody nightmare to get everyone teamed in the correct teams.
Tals
So, if you already know who both teams are going to be, why not just create a private game and send the pass to the other team after your team joins?
tals wrote:That has not been discussed! I know as I made that other suggestion!
That suggestion above sorts it for the first team - not the subsequent. I'm looking at say a battle between forum regulars that I particpate in - at the moment it would be a bloody nightmare to get everyone teamed in the correct teams.
Tals
So, if you already know who both teams are going to be, why not just create a private game and send the pass to the other team after your team joins?
ohh blimey you are persistant arn't you. Do you play team games - i've only just started so maybe its not such a big issue - but where I am looking at the mo this seems a reasonable enhancement request?
tals wrote:ohh blimey you are persistant arn't you. Do you play team games - i've only just started so maybe its not such a big issue - but where I am looking at the mo this seems a reasonable enhancement request?
Tals
Yes, I play team games and I dont ever have problems trying to get my team in, or the other team for that matter.
If I play a public team game I need to have my team online at the same time so they can join to be on the same team. If its a private game, I just send the passwords to whoever I want to play. Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but I dont see anything difficult about setting up a team game.
tals wrote:ohh blimey you are persistant arn't you. Do you play team games - i've only just started so maybe its not such a big issue - but where I am looking at the mo this seems a reasonable enhancement request?
Tals
Yes, I play team games and I dont ever have problems trying to get my team in, or the other team for that matter. If I play a public team game I need to have my team online at the same time so they can join to be on the same team. If its a private game, I just send the passwords to whoever I want to play. Maybe I am misunderstanding you, but I dont see anything difficult about setting up a team game.
Cool - ok you're more knowledgeable on this. So I have 4 players - its a passworded game - how do I ensure player 1 and 2 are in team a and player 3 and 4 are team b. They are not in the same timezone and indeed may not even be online at the same time.
tals wrote:Cool - ok you're more knowledgeable on this. So I have 4 players - its a passworded game - how do I ensure player 1 and 2 are in team a and player 3 and 4 are team b. They are not in the same timezone and indeed may not even be online at the same time.
Tals
Well, you would obviously be player 1. PM your partner first with the password, and after he joins PM the password to your opponents. It doesnt matter which order they join in since player 3 and 4 are teammates.
tals wrote:Cool - ok you're more knowledgeable on this. So I have 4 players - its a passworded game - how do I ensure player 1 and 2 are in team a and player 3 and 4 are team b. They are not in the same timezone and indeed may not even be online at the same time.
Tals
Well, you would obviously be player 1. PM your partner first with the password, and after he joins PM the password to your opponents. It doesnt matter which order they join in since player 3 and 4 are teammates.
So exatly what is wrong with having team games
join <drop down a,b,c> game
I don't understand - your way seems so convulated to ensure you're all teamed up. Don't put off an idea just because you have a work around for it - whether an idea makes fruition is a whole different ball game
tals wrote:So exatly what is wrong with having team games
join <drop down a,b,c> game
I don't understand - your way seems so convulated to ensure you're all teamed up. Don't put off an idea just because you have a work around for it - whether an idea makes fruition is a whole different ball game
Tals
I understand what you are saying, but that sounds more confusing to me than the current method. I understand it, but new players that go to join a game would not know what was going on. I am against this idea, but Lack can decide to implement it if he wants to.
Here is a good reason that this is a bad idea:
1-Will make games more complicated.
2-Your idea does not explain how you would do this.
3-What if this game is publis and the wrong person randomly joins and no one let him on their team or something stupid like that?
1. Personally I don't think it would - can't really draw drop downs on this - lacks never mucked up yet on useability yet.
2. I did ak_iceman responded to it
3. Well that could happen much more easily now - I think its probably more pertinent to private team games where you have teams joining a game - at the moment you have to ensure all your team is on at the same time for the team to work - or one team agrees not to enter till the other has, probably not such a hard thing todo. I've not done enough team games to work out if its a big issue so I do need to defer to ak on that
I would stress - part of this is discussing it, probably my biggest issue is posting something and then having totally incomprehensible responses - why post the response - it makes no sense?
I understand what Tals is saying, and it is not a bad idea. I don't have any problems with the way it is now, but Tals idea could get a game going sooner.
Just becasue something was discussed and dismissed before doesn't mean it isn't a good idea. With the way this site is growing maybe more people like the idea.
If all ideas that were discussed and dismissed when this site was first started then all the decisions would have been discussed by a few. I realize Lack has the ultimate vote on changes. As time goes on an idea that was dismissed before might be more feasible now.
It's really frustrating in a doubles tournament game to wait for a certain person's partner to join so that you can join and then your partner can join etc. so that every person is in the right team. So I thought of an idea--what if we could choose the spot where you joined? What I mean is, instead of having the spot that's empty saying -empty- it should have a link so that when you click on it you join on that team in that spot.
Level of importance: 3
Last edited by ILoveJeff on Wed Jul 04, 2007 12:30 pm, edited 5 times in total.
I understand, instead of clicking on a join game button, you could instead of the place in which you want to join which would constitute you joining.
So instead of it simply saying "empty" it would say "empty" and would be clickable i.e. have a link which joined the game in whichever spot you pressed.
Yes, that is a good idea. What I now always do in the tournaments I organise is first send PM's to the players of team 1, and then when I see that they all have joined send PM's to the players of team 2.
When players can choose the spot, then games will start sooner as you can just send PM's all at once.
I also thought this would mix with the color choosing idea. If you could choose a certain spot, then it could also mean choosing a spot with a color that you want (if you don't want pink then don't choose the last spot).
ak_iceman responded to it
