I have to say, that as someone who picked up the CL in
that last game quite literally on the last turn, that
the game (particularly on the DS side) really comes
down to communications, and that team seemed to just
lack what it took. No one seemed to want to talk and
no one took responsibility to stage-manage the side.
I think, as much as anything else, you need to make
sure that each team has one player who you feel
confident is a "field marshal" for that side. I know
these are not supposed to be grudge/team matches, and
the amount of co-ordination will inevitably be less,
but the winning teams I have been on have all had two
or three players who could delegate, check up on
whether their teammates were fulfilling their roles
and coordinate efforts to maximize results.
How you insure that, I do not quite know, since it is
not a rated "skill" per se. But I think Clint must
have a sense by now on who some of these players are.
If a team lacks these sorts of players, it will be a
short, unsatisfying game on both sides.
- Eric
···
--- ME Games Ltd <me@MiddleEarthGames.com> wrote:
We've offered 12v12 individual games but no-one bit
on that format.Basically Neutrals are the problem (IMO as a
player). I've played lots of
games where the entire outcome of the game was
pretty much determined by
Neutrals and which side they swung to. I've seen
many teams that don't
want to chat to the neutrals - you have to sweat
blood to get some
communication going.We could have an 11v11 with 3 neutrals game - that
would reduce the impact
of the Neutrals.Note Neutrals are very popular. 2950 I get around
10 players picking them
for each game (fortunately some are happy to play
non-Neutrals but even so
there is something to be said for reducing the
strength of Neutrals.Is this because Neutrals are strong (IMO yes - even
the lowly Rhun
Easterlings in 2950). Their ability to sit and
develop for 10 turns is
very strong and when they do join a side their 2000
HC st/st with 50 WMs or
6 x 60 Rank Ems has an impact!Some
>people request specific nations and that can't be
>helped, but I imagine some, like me in open games,
>give a list for either DS or FP nations (as I did
in
>the game in your example where I was Riders). If
>possible, ME Games could try to make sure not all
the
>experienced players were on one side. Maybe that's
not
>in their or the players interest, I don't know.We do balance the games - but there's nothing we can
do to control the
actual game itself. I usually spend about 1 hour
looking at the teams and
pushing "good players" onto a different side to make
sure the 10 and 10
teams are fair. It's an art not a science so it
doesn't always work. (Eg
a quality player recently had a pay rise= more work
and had to drop that
game for a while. That squiffed the side).As to "saving the open format" some games are
decided by Neutrals but
others are very much a "fair" divide of the neutrals
2v3 and quality games
in that manner.Hope that give some feedback on what I think could
be done here - other
ideas welcome.Clint
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Small Business - Try our new Resources site
http://smallbusiness.yahoo.com/resources/