Unfortunately it’s the sate of “modern” community, people getting angry if you don’t do what they want exactly. Or when they failed, they start blaming you ~for some people this anger turns into using the a-click mechanic onto wrong targets~
, and so on.
Often it’s actually newbs who are not really versed with how bad this is for the community ( I think I really really rarely seen any proper player doing this ever), as I already stopped doing team games altogether: Game is hard enough I don’t need to babysit my allies well-being and it be in perfectly good mood, and certainly don’t want to watch out for their army when there is 2+ enemies macroing all over the map. Besides: The matchmaking will put you together with anyone at some point.
It can also be less extreme change, and about adding limitations…
So would you please consider this for ladder:
Please remove teamkill-mechanic,
OR (better) please simply limit teamkill-mechanic:
with a cooldown
or with a penalty
There is no reason for this classical unlimited(!) mechanic, anyways. No modern game allows this, or if it’s really realistic games, then it’s penalized.
Just some feedback from online-experience. Thanks for reading.
Lately I’ve been informed of seemingly strange users behavior in teamgames :
Freelosing (leaving within the first seconds).
Teamkilling : worker-rushing his own allies.
AFKing : staying deliberately in the game for the first minutes, while not doing anything.
In the last case, we’ve had an example of an user probably botting to do so (the pics have been anonymized of course). And it became clear the intent was to smurf more efficiently, as contrary to 1v1, freelosing in the first seconds does not always causes defeat (= MMR loss). So that player stayed for 5:23s each game to ensure his resources were not shared, to maximize the chances of defeat (and thus tanking his MMR more efficiently).
It was a fully deliberate behavior. And though anger might be a motivation in some cases, I suspect teamkilling might be another way to achieve that same result than the AFKing method. Do you by chance have any replays left of one same player attempting to do this ? If yes, could you place yourself in his vision, and see how much variability there is from one replay from another ? If you still have some matches in your history, watching how long those teamkills have been played in a row from that user would also be informative.
Do not post them directly here though, unless you know how to anonymize them (if you want me to analyze them we’ll have to discuss a sharing method).
Step 2; realize the game is balanced around outliers and jumping through rings of fire to mitigate things which are probably too strong until you get frustrated and play something else.
Team kill is part of the SC2 experience. So is smurfing on noobs, queuing in way over your head in co-op, and hacking/cheating. If they didn’t remove it 10 years ago, they certainly won’t remove it now.
Team kill is a necessarity in both coop and team games.
Someone may wall you and you need a possibility to leave the base.
In my view dying to a troll is a more clear and less frustrating situation, that dying to a single siege tank because your “ally” blocked the only exit from the base and does not attempt to defend.
Also it may be sometimes necessary, if your ally blocks you by mistake, to destroy his building.
And so on and so on.
If you will remove team kill then they can use even worse ways to abuse it. Example: they can make wall and never let you out of the base. To be honest you can’t do anything against this behaviour. The only one solution is to ignore this (accepting some losses) or just play with friends.
Good point, I didn’t see it from that angle, but that’s legit. However what you’re describing is more akin to friendly fire (which could even be performed against your own units for the same reasons, and thus is very unlikely to be ever removed) than to teamkill (where for example one ally targets all your workers with his own).
Fixed teams are a solution to a lot of teamgames problems.
That would be a colossal buff to some units, as it would mean you could have units retreat or attack safely behind a closed wall, or large clunky units walk through smaller ones without having to be placed (ultras would behave just like colossi for example). Imagine having a massive baneling bust rushing at you while being hidden by gateball units, it would become nearly impossible to manually target fire the banes…
So while that would indeed be a fix, that would induce a lot of imbalances (supposing there aren’t already more than in 1v1).
Yes
But notice that your opponent would be allowed to do that as well, so i don’t think it would cause huge imbalance as you say. Maybe you’re right so instead of all units allow only workers to pass through allied structures so your ally won’t block you ? Dunno.
Early game full wall.
In every single base.
Perfect protection vs runby’s of any form.
Zerg early strategies nerfed.
New Protoss + Terran meta:
Proxy (double) NEXUS and barracks.
Marines sitting in Nexus (or between Nexuses) and killing everything around.
Only worker pass? The problem still exist.
I can already see the flying CCs hovering on top of a marines army, and landing on top of the marines as soon as the opponents’ lings banes dare show themselves. It would be called the portable wall formation, or the CC spear.
Queue the music :
The solution is to get a decent team mate. In other words, a fixed team. Random teams are a substitute for when your friends aren’t available (for players allergic to 1v1), but believe me those do not compare with the coordination, sync, and preparation/synergy you could get with a fixed team.
