Map/Side Choice

[Bondo]

To add a bit more clarification...in the second option, it would be like a coin toss in football where the team that wins can either choose kick/recieve...or which side of the field...only in this instance the visitor (non-host) would get a choice of map or blue/gold and then the host team would choose the option that the visitor didn't pick.

The benefit of the second option is it would prevent people from taking advantage of uneven insertion set-ups.  The downside is that it would weaken the visitor's ability to make up for host advantage.

[Typhy]

Well, I'll post my vote as visitor picks map, and host picks team. The reason for this, being that it will elimiate huge advantages at maps like Storage Depot.  I think that this would make things a lot more even. Currently, I expect to win at least 3 out of 5 and usually 4 out of 5 on the oponents host. This is because maps like Storage Depot and Warehouse District have advantages for the blue teams. ( Actually, I think it's gold team advantage for Warehouse, not sure though ). I just think that this would make it closer to being even. Seriosuly, map is more important than team, and really, host advantage isn't too big, in a smaller game, ( 2v2 or 3v3 ) there is almost no lag no matter what. And in larger cbs, the host is only one person, therefor they can't effect the game as much. Just my thoughts.

[*DAMN Hazard]

Should this possibly be moved to General Gossip where the most players would see it? I know less active forum members don't even check here.

[Flame]

I agree with Typhy. The guests should have choice of map still, but the hosting team can pick the teams. This gives each team an equal chance. There are some maps where the advantage is clear, like in Amazon, or Hacienda, but if played right, the other team can still win. Therefore, the hosting team can still take the chance and go for the team with the disadvantage, or go safetly, and hope that the other team cannot play the insert well. This is also a reason why I like Bunkers (which I know everyone hates for some reason?). The inserts are identical, so it would not matter what team you are on.

[OoA Rob]

The team that picks the map can pick the teams to.  The other team will get to pick both when it is there turn, so there is no differance.  noobs complain about inserts, vets adapt.  Clans should know how to play in all situations.

[Typhy]

Well Rob, I don't think thats the right attitude, the "If you're good enough, it shouldn't matter, anyways, both sides will get that advantage" sort of thing. I think that genraly the more fair that you can get each set of games, the better. Right now, many times it goes 4-1, and then 1-4 on the diffrent hosting sets. I think that this would make it a lot more even.

[KoS Ultimo]

 Clans should know how to play in all situations.

Yea, that was my arguement for 3rd person...

[*DAMN Hazard]

Then maybe KoS should accept that they should be ready for the situation when they play without 3rd person. You can use that same argument against you.

Btw my idea got the poll... pwn3d. PC ladders are good for something eh?

[Mr.Mellow]

I thought the whole reason the host couldn't pick teams is so they can't cheat with modded unis or something like that. Just my two cents..

[*DAMN Hazard]

I have never heard that before but if so then host could choose map and the other team chooses the team.

[Night Hawk]

It might be good in some ways and bad in others........(depending how u think of it)  if the guest chooses map and color, they can use their tactics on that map and color.  If they can only pick one, they haev to be prepared and make tactics for both.  That could be bad in some ways because other clans dont want to do that and just make tactics for one color....i think one team chooses color and another chooses map.