Originally Posted by Crux

First of all, we never have full squads of the 3rd on the same team, because we have a standing rule in place about not switching sides to play with each other if there is more than 3 members of the 3rd on the same team. So really what you're talking about here is maybe A SINGLE full squad of the 3rd on the same team.

I don't make things up, Crux. I have played both with and against teams that had 8-10 members of the third on the same team during primetime, and stayed that way, in two squads, or squadleading all the squads on that team, etc. Many others would tell you the same.

And, 97% of the time when this happens, it is because they have switched teams to be on the same side to help out the weaker team. Ie, there were 6-12 members of other IHSs on the same team, and we felt the need to balance.

When the weaker team becomes over-balanced, doesn't that make the intention moot?

Because, if you really paid attention you would understand that when the teams are unbalanced in either numbers or skill, we are amongst, if not the first to switch to make it even again. We switch before a round starts. We switch during a round. I've left a SL position on one team right before round starting because the teams didn't look even.

It doesn't matter who is the first or last to switch if you are squadded up together. I personally am not complaining about or accusing you of teamstacking, because I don't care about that. What I do care about is if you do it, then you have no right to tell them to do otherwise. Practice what you preach. If you guys are on the same team, working together, then you shouldn't be telling us not to do the same.

Second, learn to differentiate between "a squad of 3rd dominating the entire server and cruching the entire other team" and "a squad of 3rd dominated me personally and it hurt my pride, but the game as a whole was decently close." Because that's the kind of thing most people don't understand or differentiate.

You presume too much, Crux. Yes, you may be my superior in years (at least according to the tooltip on the left) but do not presume to know what I am thinking. This has nothing to do with my pride. My statements apply regardless of whether I'm on the same team or not. When I get owned by a full squad of IHS, I try harder or change my approach. And you are free to tell people this. But if you've said this before, and played in the same manner, then it is unseemly and downright wrong for you to be telling others that they shouldn't be teamstacking, and even going as far as indirectly insulting them: "If we had that option and didn't take it, what would that have made us?".

For example recently on Belgrade there was a bad mismatch taking place. I pulled my full squad of 3rd back to statue and took them out of the fight. Then when the enemy team made a buggy rush through the back of statue, we let them go so they could cap a back flag and stop them from having to fight their way out of their own UCB. Meanwhile the [i]entire rest of of our team full of TG people was too busy crushing them at Monorail to even notice how unbalanced the teams or score were.

This is, as far as I can tell, completely fabricated. I know the 3rd well enough that unless you guys have made a do-nothing squad, you are there to inflict the most brutal victory possible, every time. You and Zhohar and others have said so yourselves on many occasions. You would never "let" an enemy squad do anything, especially not to cap a back flag if you could help it.

But somehow we come out of that being the bad guys. Do you even begin to comprehend how frustrating that is?

I am not accusing you of being bad guys. You can stack or not stack all you like. All I care is that if you decide on one or the other, do NOT hold the rest of TG to a different standard with posts like the one at the beginning of this thread.

Do you not understand that when the admins turned autobalance back on, we were there complaining about the fact it stopped us from being able to switch sides to make the teams more even?

Of course you don't. Because you don't have the first ****ing clue about what goes on behind closed doors. You'd rather just stick your ignorant mug out here and throw **** in my direction because instead of sending me a private, inquiring PM, taking this public is obviously the better thing to do.

Perhaps I am ignorant. But I do percieve a fatal discrepancy between words and actions that I find unacceptable. And that is why I am posting. Your name calling aside, I am dismayed to hear that things go on behind closed doors, instead of out in the open before everyone like they should be. Transparency is the first step towards trust. That is why I made my stand publicly... here, I can have all of the forum stand as witness to me, because others need to see this too. Both you and I know the real story, so talking to you in private accomplishes nothing. Here, where others can hold you responsible, you are called upon to answer for what you have said.

~LK