Nice guide - informative, civil, without crossing the line into being a whine. This is very much the mental process I go through on pickup teams, and it's nice to see it so well codified.
Iscariot's Guide to the Tri-Form Warshade, version 2.1
I'm sorry that math > your paranoid delusions, but them's the breaks -- Nethergoat
P.E.R.C. Rep for Liberty server
Just as a note:
Your corollary example has one thing that bugs me - the utter dismissal of other's playstyles and health issues.
Yes, Speed Boost is a GREAT buff, and I'll take it ...on everyone but my Stalker. Because for everyone but my stalker, position, placement, momentum, etc....don't matter much; they just either stay back and blaze away, or they're right in the middle of the pack, smashing. My Stalker moves. A LOT. And position, placement, momentum, are VERY important to my playstyle...so the extra speed is in fact a SERIOUS detriment, especially given that I'm Claws, so I am FRIGHTENINGLY End-efficient and have a full attack chain ready at hand. I'd rather not lose an AS because I had enough extra momentum from that SB to interrupt it or put me out of range to start.
And as to the Sonics...while the devs DID do a fantastic job reducing the effects, and I will take the shields since I'm not susceptible to it...it DOES still cause some folks REAL PHYSICAL problems. As such, declaring that you're going to keep doing it anyway...well, you'd be kicked from any team of mine. Your ego is not worth someone else's pain, nor is mine.
I admit I'm much more of a 1a. I'm just constitutionally inclined to think "I can save this team, I just have to work harder!" Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.
Also, the bad PUGs I've been on (which are heavily outnumbered by the good, or at least acceptable, PUGs, I should note) tend to be bad because of one or two chumps. I hate to abandon the players who have actually been pulling their weight and leave them to deal with the bad apples.
34 heroes,
20 villains, Victory, Justice, Infinity, Virtue, Triumph, Exalted -- some more active than others
Oh well, yeah. If you want to say: "Hey guys, I'm quitting because Leeeroy and Micromanager here are bugging me; rest of you are great, send me a tell if you want an invite to a team without them," I'm all for that, and would qualify it as 4a, because, yanno, you're not giving anybody the lecture.
Choosing a Controller V2 | Splattrollers | Plant/Rad | Fire/Storm | Mind/Emp & Mind/Rad
Weird Controller Powers | Conf & XP/Time | Controller Damage
Being a Healer | The word Necessary | Natural Concept Characters
[ QUOTE ]
I'm not a fan of Ayn Rand, but to be fair, those folks have a point. Rational self-interest may not build societies capable of constructing the pyramids or putting a man on the moon, but rational self-interest does speak loud and clear to motive. Sad but true: it appears more honest, to most people, than any effort you may make to explain the situation as you see it.
[/ QUOTE ]
Wanted to disagree in part to this... Rational Self Interest did lead to putting a man on the moon. This is because rational self interest is the driving force of the USA... its called freedom and freedoms child, capitalism. As to the pyrimid. Haven't a clue.
This disagrement is a fundemental one that I have with the conclusions of Ayn Rands beliefs as shown in her two books that I've read. (The fountain head, and that other one 
don't remember the name but I enjoyed them both)
As to the rest of the guide... Kudo's its wonderful.
[ QUOTE ]
There's NO chance that somebody on a L50 toon is a newbie.
[/ QUOTE ]
Unless they bought their account, are using their room mates account, ect ect ect. They could also have coasted by being PL'd by SG mates.
Dont let levels fool you, COH/V is an easy game in the MMORPG world and anyone can get to 50 with enough play time.
Check for debt badges, look at a person's power build, and so forth. That gives a better yet still flawed view as to who is a noob.
[ QUOTE ]
Wanted to disagree in part to this... Rational Self Interest did lead to putting a man on the moon.
[/ QUOTE ]
The easiest way to say this is to point out that, rather obviously, neither American flags on the moon, nor stunning funerary monuments in the desert, are in the direct, rational self interest of, pretty much, anyone. Except in extraordinarily indirect ways that involve psychological and sociological factors rendering Rand's insight a touch simple-minded.
But like I say, it certainly applies to teaming in CoH, where for the most part (in a very small way, Hammy raids and TFs are exceptions) there aren't any grandiose schemes in play except individual players' moment-to-moment fun, which is why that kind of self-interest rules.
[ QUOTE ]
Unless they bought their account, are using their room mates account, ect ect ect. They could also have coasted by being PL'd by SG mates.
[/ QUOTE ]
Sorry, I thought I addressed this in the section following what you quoted. There aren't legitimate newbies playing L50 toons. They're illegitimate newbies; which I termed "menaces."
Choosing a Controller V2 | Splattrollers | Plant/Rad | Fire/Storm | Mind/Emp & Mind/Rad
Weird Controller Powers | Conf & XP/Time | Controller Damage
Being a Healer | The word Necessary | Natural Concept Characters
[ QUOTE ]
But like I say, it certainly applies to teaming in CoH, where for the most part (in a very small way, Hammy raids and TFs are exceptions) there aren't any grandiose schemes in play except individual players' moment-to-moment fun, which is why that kind of self-interest rules.
[/ QUOTE ]
One caveat I'd apply here, some players moment-to-moment fun may come *more* from improving the functioning of the team then purely from faster XPs. They enjoy the "middle M" part of the MMO. This probably comes more from players of defenders and controllers then, say, scrappers, but it does exist, and it provides some reason to take an "explain first" approach rather than just a quit. I still remember a team I turned around with my rad defender close to a year ago when I suggested different tactics to people closing in on 50 who were just charging in on rooms of Carnivals, I wouldn't if I'd just quit the team.
The other reason I don't like a "quit first" approach is that I see it as much like a blind invite to a team. If someone can't take the time to type out one sentence telling me why they want me to join them, or why they are quitting, I'm unlikely to think that they'll take the time to use any tactics if I were to join them, which is usually bad. So I probably won't join them.
I have also seen people have legitimate reasons to decline certain buffs; I have a friend who turns down SB on his dark scrapper, because he is trying to line up his cone attack, but gladly takes it on every other character. There are also those whose graphics cards suffer in bubbles. A bit of chatting beforehand can avoid A thinking B is an moron while B thinks A is overbearing.
When someone posts a guide that advocates absurd, unreasonable behavior, you should:
1) Point this out <-- Right answer
2) 1-star the guide <-- Right answer
3) Put the poster on ignore <-- Right answer
Oh, and if you're wondering,
[ QUOTE ]
OTOH, there're often times where you're going to be reviled on a team, at least by a few vocal teammates, for doing something that is a good idea. In particular:
Speed-boosting people ("I don't need superspeed!")
Sonic Resonance powers ("It gives me headaches!")
Confusions ("It steals our XP!")
Intangibilities-- when properly slotted & deployed ("I can't hit anything!")
That's just off the top of my head. Needless to say I don't regard objections to any of these powers as legitimate,
[/ QUOTE ]
is what triggers the bloviation detector.
Although I normally don't agree with Brillig, it was pretty obvious that all the advice about not wasting time disagreeing with teammates or stating your opinion was just smoke. The real point of the OP was the list of ways to annoy teammates, the valid reasons not to, and the unsupported claim of bogosity. It was nothing but a thinly veiled attempt to start an argument about buffing.
[ QUOTE ]
One caveat I'd apply here, some players moment-to-moment fun may come *more* from improving the functioning of the team then purely from faster XPs. They enjoy the "middle M" part of the MMO. This probably comes more from players of defenders and controllers then, say, scrappers, but it does exist, and it provides some reason to take an "explain first" approach rather than just a quit.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure I understand the first part of your caveat; moment-to-moment fun does derive from team magnification for many, including me-- it's what I like best, matter-o-fact.
Also, I'm not sure if you're arguing in favor of explain-and-stay, or explain-and-quit. I assume the latter, since that's what the rest is discussing.
Preferring it to quitting without explanation, as my guide describes, is a gamble; it's a game of skilled gambling, not of chance, to be sure. If we must, I'm sure we can agree to disagree about the odds on that particular gamble, but if somebody's doing something egregiously stupid on your team already, and nobody else's doing anything about it, I'm saying, I think the odds are poor, and for the majority of players, who have somewhat less experience with PuGs than I, it's certainly a losing gamble.
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and if you're wondering, [my list of objections that are always unreasonable] is what triggers the bloviation detector.
[/ QUOTE ]
The proposal you call absurd and unreasonable is, in short: Use your powers the way you think it's best to use them.
And you really just don't have many alternatives to offer to my "absurd unreasonable" approach: I mean, I *could* ask Brillig every time before I use a power, or I could just not use any powers at all... Or, I could exercise my own judgement about how my powers are best used. My proposal, the latter, clearly wins by a wide margin.
Choosing a Controller V2 | Splattrollers | Plant/Rad | Fire/Storm | Mind/Emp & Mind/Rad
Weird Controller Powers | Conf & XP/Time | Controller Damage
Being a Healer | The word Necessary | Natural Concept Characters
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Wanted to disagree in part to this... Rational Self Interest did lead to putting a man on the moon.
[/ QUOTE ]
The easiest way to say this is to point out that, rather obviously, neither American flags on the moon, nor stunning funerary monuments in the desert, are in the direct, rational self interest of, pretty much, anyone. Except in extraordinarily indirect ways that involve psychological and sociological factors rendering Rand's insight a touch simple-minded.
[/ QUOTE ]
Actually that was my very thought. Rational self interest in combination with the liberties and freedoms that are embodied in the idea and culture of the US are IMO the underlying and prevailing factors to most of the greatest achievements within this century. Give people the freedom to help themselves and as a group the people can and will do the most extraordinary and amazing things. Like putting a man on the moon.
Sorry I didnt read all of this thread and not even all of the guide,but im half asleep,cant go to sleep, and bored to death. But what I read of the guide was pretty guide. That first part about quitting a bad team is the boring way. I usually complain and stay on and wait for them to kick me. Then message them a few thousand times..maybe sing em a song... I once actually sang one person the whole green day song American Idiot and they thought I was so talented that I was let back onto the team. Just my amazing talent.
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One caveat I'd apply here, some players moment-to-moment fun may come *more* from improving the functioning of the team then purely from faster XPs. They enjoy the "middle M" part of the MMO. This probably comes more from players of defenders and controllers then, say, scrappers, but it does exist, and it provides some reason to take an "explain first" approach rather than just a quit.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure I understand the first part of your caveat; moment-to-moment fun does derive from team magnification for many, including me-- it's what I like best, matter-o-fact.
Also, I'm not sure if you're arguing in favor of explain-and-stay, or explain-and-quit. I assume the latter, since that's what the rest is discussing.
Preferring it to quitting without explanation, as my guide describes, is a gamble; it's a game of skilled gambling, not of chance, to be sure. If we must, I'm sure we can agree to disagree about the odds on that particular gamble, but if somebody's doing something egregiously stupid on your team already, and nobody else's doing anything about it, I'm saying, I think the odds are poor, and for the majority of players, who have somewhat less experience with PuGs than I, it's certainly a losing gamble.
[ QUOTE ]
Oh, and if you're wondering, [my list of objections that are always unreasonable] is what triggers the bloviation detector.
[/ QUOTE ]
The proposal you call absurd and unreasonable is, in short: Use your powers the way you think it's best to use them.
And you really just don't have many alternatives to offer to my "absurd unreasonable" approach: I mean, I *could* ask Brillig every time before I use a power, or I could just not use any powers at all... Or, I could exercise my own judgement about how my powers are best used. My proposal, the latter, clearly wins by a wide margin.
[/ QUOTE ]
...So long as your judgement does NOT infringe on the ability, fun, or health of another player; however, by your own declaration, you have decided all "this buff does not help me, it harms me" explanations are invalid out-of-the-gate. If someone says that Speedboost messes their playstyle up, AND understands the other effects of the power - but still chooses to forgo it because they are MORE effective when their controls don't feel like they've been dipped in butter, does it really hurt your ego so much to NOT put it on them as requested? If someone says that a Sonic shield gives them a pounding headache, then yes, I'd agree they MIGHT want to talk to a physician before playing more; I'd finish the mission without bubbling THEM alone, and then either quit or kick, with a polite /tell to that effect. No person's ego is worth another person's pain.
Most excellent.
I'm SO pleased that someone has articulated what I (sometimes, in vain) try to do by 'demonstration'.
You just hit those nails on the head, whack, whack, whack.
Awesome guide. Should be REQUIRED READING for all.
Although, I predict there will be many who just Don't Get It; :-) They're the same as the 'menaces' you mention, people using other people's high level characters and consequently not having the slightest clue of what they are doing.
Ex
--
Ex.
Part-Troll, who used to be Excession777, now playing pantomime with people's mindlets.
--
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
One caveat I'd apply here, some players moment-to-moment fun may come *more* from improving the functioning of the team then purely from faster XPs. They enjoy the "middle M" part of the MMO. This probably comes more from players of defenders and controllers then, say, scrappers, but it does exist, and it provides some reason to take an "explain first" approach rather than just a quit.
[/ QUOTE ]
I'm not sure I understand the first part of your caveat; moment-to-moment fun does derive from team magnification for many, including me-- it's what I like best, matter-o-fact.
Also, I'm not sure if you're arguing in favor of explain-and-stay, or explain-and-quit. I assume the latter, since that's what the rest is discussing.
Preferring it to quitting without explanation, as my guide describes, is a gamble; it's a game of skilled gambling, not of chance, to be sure. If we must, I'm sure we can agree to disagree about the odds on that particular gamble, but if somebody's doing something egregiously stupid on your team already, and nobody else's doing anything about it, I'm saying, I think the odds are poor, and for the majority of players, who have somewhat less experience with PuGs than I, it's certainly a losing gamble.
[/ QUOTE ]
My apologies for not explaining better; I was arguing in favor of explaining, rather than your strongly recommended option 4 of quitting without explaining. That can be explain and stay awhile longer, then explain and quit, but the exact course depends on how the team reacts IMHO.
The chances of the team or even of any one individual learning something from an attempt to explain the problem(s) may be low, but they are vanishingly small if you just quit without ANY explanation. For all they know you might have disconnected, or hit the button by mistake, or been discovered by your spouse playing when you weren't supposed to, or had an urgent phone call. . .
In my experience, at least 50% of the time I'm able to get some improvement in behavior from discussion with the team. Even if it were only one tenth that often, it would be worth my time to try once or twice because of the chance of generating an improved player for the future.
Part of maximizing the team to me is using my powers effectively; that may mean NOT using SB, for example, on someone if it messes up their positioning, whether due to attacks they want to align precisely (like the Dark scrapper cone) or due to lag on their computer. If its too crippling to the team (sorry, you can't use any rad debuffs because I can't take the lag) I may have to leave, but I'll certainly tell them why because I might team with them again in a couple more months when they get a new computer, say.
Another part of it is that chance to improve tactics, either my own or others, through discussion. After over 2 years of play, I still learn things from other people, and sometimes it only happens when I initiate a conversation about a team problem.
Guide to How To Cope With Teams Where
Note: For anybody who wonders, this guide has been on my mind a long time. It reflects not 2 weeks, but more like 2 years, of specific experiences. And yes, I'm a notoriously cranky guy.
Somebody's Doin' Sompin' Egregiously Bad
As a service to the community, I want to share my research and wisdom regarding membership in teams and options available to players who find themselves in teams they don't like.
There are four distinct options you have, when you find yourself on a team that's doing things very badly. These options are not all created equal!
1a. Put up with it, and stay on the team.
2a. Complain about it, and stay on the team.
3a. Complain about it, and quit.
4a. Quit. <--Right answer
Option 1a
This is known colloquially as the "doormat" option.
Pros: Few. If you're not duoing with your spouse, and you're not playing on a ghost server at 3 am, there's no reason not to go find a different team.
Cons: Not only are you hurting yourself, but also you're degrading the entire game experience, for everyone.
Pardon? I'm being hyperbolic? Not at all! Yes, people can solo, but the game's geared around teaming. It's dynamically self-adjusting, to state-of-the-art teaming. Communities are like that. What it means is, the more you support people acting like clowns, the more clownism will flourish.
Don't be part of the problem. Do not be a doormat.
Option 2a
A respectable option, especially for those who like to argue, rather than play the game. Part of the rationale is to help other players understand the game better (in cases where it's hard to tell whether people legitimately don't know what they're doing), part of the rationale is, the team leader may decide that both your complaints and the behavior of the person you're complaining about are way too annoying, so that they kick the person you're complaining about. If that happens, it's great. If you get kicked (too), that's only the risk you run on any team where you're not the leader.
The problem with option #2 is that what usually happens is this:
[ QUOTE ]
You: "Hey guys? Doing things that way is pointless. Let's do it this way instead."
Leader: "You just don't like my team's playstyle, is what you mean."
You: "No, I mean, in general, this is just slow, risky and annoying to most players, for the following reasons: [reasons]"
Leader: "ZOMG! I play this game for fun, not to be lectured! If you don't like my team, get off it!" ... sometimes followed by a kick.
[/ QUOTE ]
Two ugly truths are involved:
<ul type="square">[*]The first is (and I'm pretty sure there' are numerous folk sayings that back me up here) people rarely take good advice.[*]For many, the very idea of disagreement is terrifying, so even if you're disagreeing with somebody who just said 2+2=5, you're the badguy.[/list]
But there's an even bigger problem with option #2. That is, complaints have no real teeth. (I know there are times when teams really need to talk a little more, and I'm all for that, but this is the guide to egregious stupidity, not the guide to communication or dealing with newbies.)
What I meant by "no real teeth," is that, unless you're the team leader (and to a lesser extent even if you are) talk carries no weight. People complain about the weather, the tightness of their socks, the color of electric melee animations, and everything else under the sun, all the time. Complaining doesn't amount to much.
And I do NOT advocate griefing a stupid team. (So many of these options boil down, like this one, to: that's a complete waste of your time, and I assume you value your time.)
Option 3a
This option, obviously, has a lot in common with both 2 and 4. The advantage it has over option #2 is that it has "teeth." By quitting the team, you're depriving them of the only thing you really have the right to deprive them of-- your complicity in their stupidity.
Plus, people tend to notice it when teammates quit, because quitting puts your money where your mouth is. All the rest is just talk.
The gamble of option #3 is that, as mentioned above, people who disagree are usually automatically wrong. The net effect of explaining why you're quitting before you quit may help a few people understand your decision and agree with it, but more often, it will be their rationale for dismissing your decision as unreasonable.
I'm not a fan of Ayn Rand, but to be fair, those folks have a point. Rational self-interest may not build societies capable of constructing the pyramids or putting a man on the moon, but rational self-interest does speak loud and clear to motive. Sad but true: it appears more honest, to most people, than any effort you may make to explain the situation as you see it.
But I'm getting ahead of myself. Option #3 is a gamble; sometimes it leads to people understanding your point, which has a small payoff for the time you invest in explaining yourself, which is: the community improves infinitesimally from the transaction.
Option 4a
As I've been saying, there's not a lot of reason to believe explaining yourself will get you anywhere (assuming you're not dealing with newbies, which is a seperate subject, and normally quite visible), and explaining yourself puts you at risk of being perceived as "just some guy who wants to argue about everything."
That's why I strongly advocate option #4-- quit without explaining yourself.
First off, the payoff is normally quite large; as I discussed under option #1, you can nearly always find a different team-- assuming you don't team with your significant other or play on a dead server during dead hours.
Secondly, it's by *far* the best way to get people capable of thinking things through at all, to actually do so.
Yes, there're always those in a crowd who'll never think anything through. How can we hope to address that problem? Only by making sure we're the team leader every time-- but that's the subject of a separate guide.
For people capable of thinking, the fact that a teammate just quit (it's pretty easy to see "so-and-so quit" on the right screen) without explanation, is the best way to get them to really reach any kind of conclusion about *why* they quit.
It's not a given that they'll care, but people who just don't care are, like people who never think, not a problem that your behavior can ever solve.
Corollary-- how to Cope With Teams Where
You're Doing Sompin' Good That Others Don't Like
The same kind of thinking can be applied to situations where teammates don't like the way you're doing things. It might be that you're really just doing something stupid yourself-- in which case, by all means, quit it!
(Also, by the way, questions about tactics and power use should always be given careful, civil responses. People do have the right to expect you to discuss how best to work together-- if you can't do that, do us all a favor and start soloing more. And keep an open mind to the possibility that you really may be doing something that's not optimal-- people who use Gale nonstop, I'm looking at you! O.O)
OTOH, there're often times where you're going to be reviled on a team, at least by a few vocal teammates, for doing something that is a good idea. In particular:
<ul type="square">[*]Speed-boosting people ("I don't need superspeed!")[*]Sonic Resonance powers ("It gives me headaches!")[*]Confusions ("It steals our XP!")[*]Intangibilities-- when properly slotted & deployed ("I can't hit anything!")[/list]
That's just off the top of my head. Needless to say I don't regard objections to any of these powers as legitimate, but this is not the place to argue that. The point is, what should you do when somebody asks you to behave in ways that are counterproductive?
The options here are:
1b. Stay on the team, quit doing what they don't like.
2b. Quit the team.
3b. Stay on the team, keep doing what they don't like. <--Right answer
Option 1b
This is also the "doormat" solution to the problem. The sole advantage is that it gets somebody being unreasonable to shut up. The disadvantage is, they team's playing less effectively than it could be. Since, as discussed above, you surely can find another team, this is a terrible option to exercise.
Option 2b
This option is respectable, but it's critically unlike its cousin option #4a, because ultimately you're justified in thinkinng your approach is right, whereas teammate(s) under 4a are not. (Which is the premise on which making these two guides distinct, is based.) Quitting the team because somebody complains is a gamble, because there's always a chance that the team is clueful enough to know the complaints are unreasonable, and you may be taking on the burden of finding a new team more often than is really necessary. (I'm aware this sounds unduly optimistic, but at present it seems to me a close thing. There *are* clueful people playing the game.)
Option 3b
This option is the strongest of the three. The worst that can happen is that people will continue to voice unreasonable complaints.
The leader may kick you under this option, but that's really only the risk you assume any time you're on a team that you're not leading (and to a lesser extent, even if you are, since people you lead can always quit and reform). You can be kicked at any time from any team, for bad reasons, if you're not the leader.
This is not to say there's no drawback to people complaining in the team channel. While they're doing so, odds are they're not contributing fully to the fight. What that means is: you have teammates that want to do something other than contribute productively. If you find that that's the case, you're on a team where somebody is doing something egregiously bad, and you should exercise option 3a or 4a above.
Note: It will be clever and amusing when someone points out that this guide is an example of 1a. Except it's not. Chattable team channels are incidental to the game, whereas, reading what is written here is the only reason to come here.
Bonus-- Guide to Spotting Newbies
and when to explain things more
There're two reasons you should spend more time explaining things to teammates. One is, if they're a newbie. The other is, if you're using a really exotic power.
There aren't many exotic powers in the game, but I've already mentioned two of them: confuses and intangibilities. Rarely played sets, too, like Trick Arrow and Dark Miasma, may increase your expectation that people don't know what your power is doing. There's no iron-clad way to know if your powers are exotic-- you kind of have to have played the game a while to know that sort of thing. If in doubt, try asking somebody you know who's been around a while, or perhaps ask on the forums, if anything in your powerset tends to be hard for teammates to understand.
Spotting newbies isn't effortless either. Look for clues-- do they ask about where such-and-such is a lot? (Personally, I still can't remember where all the difficulty-setting agents in Paragon are, so this isn't iron-clad either.)
One thing that can definitely help you rule *out* whether they're a newbie is the level of the character they're playing. There's a good chance somebody on a L5 character is a newbie. There's NO chance that somebody on a L50 toon is a newbie.
I know, I know-- what about people who're playing toons they didn't level themselves? Well, call it a word game if you will, but I don't regard those folks as legitimate newbies, I regard them as menaces. And at any rate, for our purposes here, they're not the kind of people you ought to invest time in explaining things to.
And newbie-ness is a spectrum, too, remember. L40s stepping into the shard for the first time are a kind of newbie. People playing their first controller or mastermind are newbies to pet-wrangling.
The point is, there're people whose ignorance is innocent, but that doesn't mean we can't hold anybody responsible for anything. It's not hard to tell the difference; let your intuition and experience guide you.
Choosing a Controller V2 | Splattrollers | Plant/Rad | Fire/Storm | Mind/Emp & Mind/Rad
Weird Controller Powers | Conf & XP/Time | Controller Damage
Being a Healer | The word Necessary | Natural Concept Characters