Or you could try communicating well as a team. (shrug)

How about using dice ? No puppeting and only one master plan. Bonus advantage is different mentality each game and turn. Every idea is helpful. The most important is that your plan works and wins the game.

3 vs 3 with alts is fine for me. It may not be best if team strategy stays the same.

Edited 8/22/2015 02:25:33

How about random teams? I increased prerequisites.

If you are interested please comment below.

Edited 8/22/2015 02:33:47

prerequisits don't matter in eu3v3.anyone can gave low bootrate,high 1v1,2v2,3v3 winrate and still suck at EU3v3,we need alts for more competition,teamgames are still a good option for those who want to learn

I think a 3v3 alt-game is intrinsically different than a 3v3 team-game (due to the missing communication/teamwork barrier and the ability of a single strategic vision to succeed and micromanagement to occur perfectly) so, while I agree with JSA that 3v3 alt-games are a valid, unique and worthwhile format, I think it makes sense to have only one of the two formats within a single ladder.

Edited 8/22/2015 02:59:55

Lolowut, communicating well as a team means doing what the better player wants a majority of the time. To my mind, it is still puppeting, although I can understand why you think otherwise. It still makes me not want to play.

Random teams means that even less top players will participate. Rather than having to tell a good player what to do sometimes, you now have to tell your teammate what to do all the time if you want to win.

I think it comes down to whether or not you want a competitive ladder. You can have a ladder with random teams, or with fixed teams, assuming no alts. But if you want a competitive ladder, you're going to have to allow alts I think.

Alts kind of defeat the purpose of a team-game.. Don't you think?

Okay fine I agree with Ryrio and JSA, I will allow Alts now, but I will not play with my own alts.

^^ Not at all. Read JSA's post.

An example:

Have you ever played an imbalanced scenario? Say 6v1 or whatever, with one massive player and roughly equal income?

You've probably noticed, then, that the one big player seems to have an advantage. Why?

Say you've talked to your team and have agreed on your turn order: Move A, Move B, etc.

Similarly, the big player has figured out their turn order.

If turn order isn't cyclic, the distributed team is going to run into some issues because they can't guarantee Move A occurring before Move B (what if the player that's supposed to commit Move B ends up going before the player that's supposed to commit Move A?). Even if it's the same player, there's a lot more random chance/luck involved. Even in no-luck cyclic, they're still going to run into this issue in the pick stage.

And suppose that Move A and Move B need to happen on one player's end- and it's very important that they go first. Well, in a team game, that's not going to happen and that player will have to wait for their teammates to cycle through before committing Move B- which can make all the difference.

At least as far as turn order planning goes, a 3v3 alt-game introduces some complications that make it more interesting than a simple 1v1.

That said, I think that gameplay in a 3v3 alt-game is still simpler than in a 3v3 team-game because the communication barrier is real (especially if you live in different time zones and can't have a full discussion each and every turn- you never really get near the same decision-making depth that you would find in a 3v3 alt-game). Against the average 3v3 team, a team of alts is going to have a huge advantage because it has zero issues with teammate unreliability/communication gaps.

I also find JSA's argument that the best communicating teams should win if communication is important to be a bit specious. That would only be the case if communication is the primary aspect of gameplay. Skill is still dominant, but that doesn't mean that communication/team planning doesn't determine the outcome of a good portion of games.

Ultimately, a 3v3 alt team has an advantage when it comes to planning and I think it's most fair to pit a 3v3 alt team against other 3v3 alt teams because 3v3 alt-games take out the communication layer altogether and instead increase focus on the core planning/strategy layer of the game.

Edited 8/22/2015 03:41:44

3v3....Six Players....SIX DIFFERENT PLAYERS. Whats the point in playing a 3v3 game if you're controlling the entire team. Thats too much pressure, why would anyone want that.

Lolowut, communicating well as a team means doing what the better player wants a majority of the time. To my mind, it is still puppeting, although I can understand why you think otherwise.

Right, that's not how I've played 2v2s or 3v3s in MD setting for ladders/clan league. We discuss picks and moves through skype or ingame and commit multiple orders until we find something out. Usually we can just separately play for obvious turns.

Puppeting is stupid. Communicating well is fun.

Puppeting is stupid. Communicating well is fun.

+1

Plus, when you've got three minds in the team, might as well take advantage of all of them.

Unless you are an hydra.

Stupid joke...

Same old story. Everyone wants to play 3v3 Europe. Someone tries to organize something. Nobody wants to play it.

The Myth explained: http://www.warlight.net/Forum/105249-myth-3v3-europe-league

Edited 8/22/2015 06:12:55

""" Suffice it to say that 3v3 with alts is much more complicated than playing a 1v1, and much more engaging. """

Very true. I'm a big fan of playing with alts since it really helps you develop as a player.




""" If the point of a 3v3 is teamwork, then why don't the teams that work together more beat the teams that don't work together as much. 3v3 is much more about skill than teamwork. """

Teams that work together more should beat teams that don't, unless of course there is significant skill mismatch.




""" Lolowut, communicating well as a team means doing what the better player wants a majority of the time. To my mind, it is still puppeting, although I can understand why you think otherwise. It still makes me not want to play. """

I refuse to believe that you are so much better than your team mates that you puppet all of them every game. Communicating can be fun as long as the team actually wants to.

Ok, sign me up, i will play with any 2 people who speak decent english and respond to team chat. Next 2 people to ask will be invited to "team a".

I'll be on your team piggy, we just need 5+ teams or I won't even bother starting it.

I would like to join. Doubt I can though due to my level.

^ No problem. Alts are allowed now and no prerequisites.

I ask to be on piggy's team if there's still an opening. Shameless noob here looking to get better.

Edited 8/22/2015 14:30:33