Tweet
This is really shameful behaviour.
-
-
This isn't a good idea, because a lot of why DGs are successful is that people talk and chat with their friends. If this were a 50-60 person DG, then I'd say it might be a good idea - maybe - but with a relatively small game, you gain a lot more by allowing teams to naturally form. Only those who will be active will choose to form teams, after all.Originally posted by Beta
This may work as well. Maybe we need the eligible players to indicate if the want to be (a) a turn player (b) not a turn player but active or (c) lurker for now.
The a's, b's, and c's can then be randomly assigned, which would help balance the teams.<Reverend> IRC is just multiplayer notepad.
I like your SNOOPY POSTER! - While you Wait quote.Comment
-
Ya no random teams for me.
I choose who I play with or I don't play at all.*"Winning is still the goal, and we cannot win if we lose (gawd, that was brilliant - you can quote me on that if you want. And con - I don't want to see that in your sig."- BetaComment
-
OK - understood. But the poll seems to direct us to a 6-7-8 team game, which if it is pitboss, is not a problem. In fact, I would promote a 10 to 14 team game in pitboss. Let's rock!Cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war .... aw, forget that nonsense. Beer, please.Comment
-
Looking at the above numbers, it looks like "5" was the median.
9 votes for 4 or fewer.
*** 5 votes for 5 ***
10 votes for 6 or more.
3 votes for the
team.
1st C3DG Term 7 Science Advisor 1st C3DG Term 8 Domestic Minister
Templar Science Minister
AI: I sure wish Jon would hurry up and complete his turn, he's been at it for over 1,200,000 milliseconds now.
Comment
Comment