Team Poll

I have some questions about what people think about something, so I guess this may be a poll.

My questions have to do with teams and setting rules.

1) Do you think that more team leaders should set some simple rules or would you find this offensive?

2) If you feel that the leader should set some rules, what should they be?

3) If you feel that it would be offensive for the leader to set rules, why?

Depends what you mean by "rules." A team leader should maintain some degree of control over the team - if two (or more) team members won't get along or coooperate, or one insists on AFKing two minutes into every mission and leeching, they should do something. OTOH, if they feel they have to micromanage everything and "We MUST do it MY way," it's not a fun team.

Rules:
- Don't be a twit.

See my Guides and Tutorials

I'll be talking about these questions as a team leader red-side.

Usually I don't set rules so much as guidelines. The first guideline is "everybody fights". What this means in clearer terms is that if a Brute separates from the team to fight another mob I'm cool with it, assuming it's not somehow putting the rest of the team in jeopardy a lot. If a Stalker separates from the team to "scout ahead", I consider it leeching off of the team's XP, and I'd send him a tell asking him to join the team and contribute to the combat. If he doesn't, I'd kick him (this has yet to happen). If a Corruptor decides to completely neglect his Primary in favour of his Secondary, I may not agree with his playstyle, but I still consider using your Secondary as contributing to combat and he gets to stay and I won't say a thing.

There's an exception to that guideline, though, in that if we get a mission where we need to hunt glowies or hostages in an outdoor instances, one team member can scout ahead so we spend less time on a wild goose chase.

And that's basically it for most cases. If you fight, I generally don't have any orders to give. You click your powers and I am happy.

As for the other cases, well, the most common case where I actually do set a rule for the team to follow are Mayhem missions. I feel many players are more used with Safeguard missions where rushing towards the bank is a good strategy, and they want to do the same in Mayhem missions. I make it explicitly clear, though, that you need to stay with the team and fight your way to the bank with the team, though. This is mostly because rushing to the bank will trigger a lot of Longbow ambushes which may not be too huge a problem for higher levels, but especially in the lower levels that can be devastating. Basically, you rush ahead, you spawn ambushes, and you are therefore a liability to the team.

Oh, also, I wouldn't call this exactly a rule, but when I'm forming a Strike Force, I make it explicitly clear that we will not speedrun or stealth any missions, but fight our way through. I don't do that so much though because I want to have a rule to enforce, but because a Strike Force team needs to last for a while, so I consider it important everyone knows what kind of flavour of Strike Force we are talking about.

But yeah, that's the gist of it. I like keeping rules and guidelines as scarce as possible, but sometimes they just tend to be needed. More than that, though, it's important for team leaders to be communicative. That's not to say they need to set those rules or guidelines, but being told what to expect next is always nice. Silence is golden, but it's also makes for horribly weak armor and it's heavy so it slows the team down.

Communication is key to a good team.

When I run my PuG STF/RSF's (which happens frequently), I set 3 simple rules.

Rule 1: follow instructions
Rule 2: FOLLOW instructions
Rule 3: refer to rule 1 and 2

It usually works out and results in surprisingly smooth SF/TF's done relatively fast

I have one rule: Everyone Fights.

Other than that I feel no need to act like a dictator and tell people what to do. I assume that you are a competent sensible player until proven otherwise and that I don't need to tell you how to play. If you're playing poorly and it's hurting the team then I will discuss it with you but otherwise as long as you're helping out and the team isn't struggling I'm not that bothered.

On TFs I will occasionally provide guidance as to what needs to be done in any situation where tactics more complicated than "get 'em" are needed but for the most part I find that simply pointing the team in the general direction of something they can kill and leaving them to it works just fine.

If a team leader has rules, they should be discussed up front not as we go.

Other than that, idc

My one rule is a little more specific.

"Everyone fights the enemies, NOT each other"

Cause I really, really hate arguments, whether they're the "u suk" kind or the passive aggressive ******** kind.

1. Participate.
2. If things go south, make constructive suggestions or follow directions.
3. Have fun.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dispari I don't know why Dink thinks she's not as sexy as Jay was. In 5 posts she's already upstaged his entire career.

ETA: My responses below apply mainly to PUGs.

1) Do you think that more team leaders should set some simple rules or would you find this offensive?

I think "setting rules" is generally a bad idea, and will turn people off, but they can certainly make suggestions, especially if they are the mission holder. For example, I like doing the side missions in Safeguards/Mayhems, so if I form a team to do one, I'll state up front that we're going to do the sides, and make sure everyone is OK with that. If someone doesn't want to, they usually drop.


2) If you feel that the leader should set some rules, what should they be?

Unless the team is doing really poorly, I don't think the leader needs to lead beyond things like, "Follow Tank X" or asking things like, "Do we want to just stealth this mission?" or "Do we want to mop up stragglers?" Leaders who dictate the way things are going to go, beyond strategy that is needed in some cases (SFs and TFs), tend to cause me to leave the team.


3) If you feel that it would be offensive for the leader to set rules, why?

People play this game to have fun by-and-large, and a lot of people don't find taking orders and following someone else's rules fun.

The one rule I have for full teams is we start when six people are ready. That way no one feels guilty if they need to train, sell or quick afk.

I don't run teams, I run TFs, so if you join up with me, you're in it for the long haul. As such, before I start every TF, I list my rules and the stipulation that they must be followed. I give everyone a chance to bugger out if they don't like the rules.

I call them, DKTF rules. (My initials + Task Force)

The first rule of DKTF is: You do not talk about DKTF.
The second rule of DKTF is: At all times, you must be having fun.
Third rule: If you think you can handle it, you're free to go for it.
Fourth rule: If you though you could handle it, but couldn't, you're expected to get up or hosp out.
Fifth rule: Any build, any budget, no exclusions.
The sixth and final rule of DKTF is: If this is your first DKTF, you have to take an alpha strike.



Haven't had someone complain about the rules yet.

I don't usually set rules for the teams I run, and I run a lot.

Everybody fights is a given, if somebody isn't, I will send them a tell and boot them if necessary.

When necessary, will issue a follow the tank message.

The only thing I habitually explain is that because I run a lot of TFs on +diff, the bug that's existed since the beginning of the difficulty slider, where if you enter a mission from a zone other than the one the leader is in before he does, it sets at +0 regardless of what the slider says.

For regular teaming, I don't set rules but if I team with someone else that wants to set rules, that's fine. If you're the team lead and want things to run a certain way that's fine with me - I know where the 'quit team' button is if I don't like it.

For TFs, especially 'speed' TFs, I expect there to be a few rules.

1) Follow the leader's directions. If he says, "Stay at the entrance, I will grab the blinkies" then you need to keep your butt at the entrance and not say, "I have stealth I'll grab a blinkie". Case in point, Operative Renault SF for the Barracuda ambush... it goes much smoother and faster when everyone is together.

2) A rule for the Leader : If you are going to set rules you must do so at the beginning before you form the strike/task force. In addition, if you are going to give directions you MUST DO SO IN CHAT. Don't expect the people that aren't in Vent to just magically know what you intend to do and what you expect them to do. Communication is vital.

3) **** happens. When it does, deal with it in a mature fashion.

The reason I ask. first off, I've been in the game just over 6 months and probably done thousands of missions but I still think of myself as a beginner and still learning. I enjoy playing solo and I also enjoy joining teams.

Someone mentioned PuGs, well, that's mostly what I end up on. Once in a while the leader of one of these will friend me and continue to invite me and these always do well. But it is not really a PuG, I was probably the only random person in the group with all the others chosen from that same list of friends.

I guess I was speaking specifically of PuGs in a way. I've noticed two things with PuGs.

1) If the leader does not set rules things either go really well or go horribly bad with near team wipe throughout the mission(s). There usually is not much in-between. Many times everyone knows what they should be doing, on the other hand, there are many times when it seems no one is even trying to work together.

2) If the leader of a PuG states some simple rules to anyone new that joins I rarely see these teams go south. While there may be one or two bad fights, as a general rule these teams are more fun to be on. I'm not talking about anything extensive, more like guidelines like:
a) Everyone follows X (whoever X may be, but a tank more often than not);
b) Everyone stays together (there are some exceptions, as mentioned by some that have replied)
c) We don't start a mission until everyone is on the map. I have to say, I rather like those that insist that everyone is there before we begin. I have a relatively fast computer and connection and am usually one of the first to get in. However, I know people that have slow computers and/or connections that are quite put off when they get in and find that the mission is nearly completed. (of course the exception is that if someone says it's okay to start without them.)

As far as how the missions go, I've recently started to notice this more. I have created my first Empath Defender. I didn't think I'd like it, but I'm having a blast with it. This is the main reason that I've started noticing the difference. I must say that it is so much easier to keep people on their feet when everyone stays in a group. As soon as people start splitting of into two or three different groups then my job becomes extremely difficult if not completely impossible.

To be honest, I've not had the opportunity to see a team where someone expected to not fight, and I hope I never do. I've never joined a team where the leader had to state outright that everyone needs to be in the fight. Seems like common sense to me.

As far as rules if I am running a team, I will generally hold off and see how it goes. If everything seems to be going well then I will let everyone roll. On the other hand if after the first battle or 3 it seems that things are going to get out of hand then I'll say.... "Ok, this isn't going well, from now on we will...." and give the sticking together/follow the tank rule or whatever seems to fit the circumstances. All it takes is one really bad mission and you find yourself alone again when it's over, if they stick around that long.

It really depends on the situation. For example, if I was running a farm, I'll simply say "hey this my farm, so please don't grab glowy" or etc.

Other than specific situations like that, I don't care what people do, as long as they're doing something. If they're doing something I don't like, I'll say it and if they keep doing it, I'll simply boot.

The only times I set rules is during a Master run or a farm, if it involves not clicking blinkies and so on. Rest of the time, go nuts and attack as you wish as long as you aren't triggering undue ambushes.

Basically, don't be an anchor on the team and contribute in some manner...opening a can of worms here, but if you have team buffs and you don't cast your team buffs, gentle reminders will be given out.

If im leading a team i would like that everyone fights no matter what. If you have to go away from keyboard for a min or two fine but not fifteen times in a mish. One thing that i wont tolerate is any form of bigotry or hatespeech in anyway on any team. If im leading they get booted if im not leading i will leave.

Laying out a strategy for a particular encounter is fine (e.g., are we gonna try and separate Romulus from his Nictus, or just Zerg Rush him?). But if I joined a PUG and the leader started spouting a bunch of DOs and DON'Ts for general gameplay, my impression would be "This person sounds really uptight and is probably not going to be much fun to play with." I don't think I've ever actually run into anyone like that, though.

Well, it depends on how they do it. I mean, you can say "We're gonna run fast through these, OK?" or "We usually stick all together so try not to wander please." There's plenty of ways to "give orders" without being a jerk about it.

LEGION OF VALOR - Be a part of the Legend!