cobaltgrc

I also played my first captains game last night and they seem really cool. I enjoy taking orders, so I'd like to play in more of them if I could.

nickhastapee

I acctually captained my first captains game last night. It was lots of fun for 4 rounds...

__________________

Ferret

Apathy? I initiated a vote - out of the 14 users in the server, one objected. All it takes is one objection, I know. However, the user who objected left, what, five minutes later?

So I initiated another vote. Everyone voted yes for a captains game. Seeing this I initiated a vote for which map we would play - Italy. Everyone voted yes.

You then objected to starting one because of 'apathy' and lack of teamwork if I recall correctly.

I did everything I could to get one going. You won't see me volunteer for one of the two captains slots because I do not have a mic for the time being.

Case in point - everyone wanted a captains game. We all voted on a map. You then objected because of 'apathy'. Just what exactly is your definition of apathy? Just wondering...

Root

I believe I eventually organised one after a map was vaguely agreed on and we went through the usual nonsense of trying to get 2 captains. The other night someone spent 2 or 3 hours asking about a captains game, and not a single other person spoke up. Just as that player was leaving, one other player (who'd been there a while), started asking, and we had to sit through more time with no one else speaking up. I think that can pretty much be described as apathy.

If EVERYONE doesn't speak up, I'll take the silence as a no vote, and won't run a captains game. What I require from now on if you want me to run a game, is a clear yay vote from every person on the server, a clear majority vote on what map you all want, *and* I want 2 captains to come forward. I require this *before* I will run a game. IMHO, you have your facts a little disorganised here.

I would *suggest* that only people with mics step up and captain, but it is only a *suggestion* (albeit an extremely sensible one). If you read the original thread on captains games, you must be a TG reg to be a captain. Another *suggestion* is that you only captain if you are prepared to *lead*. Some captains games I've played have lacked much in the way of leadership from the team commander. Thats not a slight against those people, not everyone is a leader, but it does make a game more enjoyable if the boss man is worrying about the orders so that I can get on and play.

Root

__________________

Ferret

Fact of the matter is, on this particular night, I initiated the vote - EVERYONE voted yes and EVERYONE agreed to play Italy. I distinctly remember saying... 'all in favor of a captains game say YES'. Within a minute every single person had voted yes. Following this I then said... 'vote for captains map' followed by 'italy'. Everyone, rather quickly, replied with 'italy'. We then awaited for your decision and you turned it down because of apathy and lack of teamwork - despite every single person in the server at the time being for it. You then left shortly after that. Are you saying you came back into the server and started a game? I don't know, whatever. It's a moot point now.

Root

Hmmm... I've had a think about it, and I've confused two seperate times. Regardless of whether or not every last person on the server wanted the captains game, the time your talking about? There was ZERO teamwork going on at the time, certainly on the team I was on. We require teamwork ALL the time on our servers. If I don't see it going on in general, there's absolutely no way I'll organise a captains game.

Root

__________________

Whitetiger

Well all that I know is that everytime I have been on a captains game it has been a lot of fun. I will most gladly be part of a captains game at any time. I even tried Captains position once and we did not do too badly. Menace is a hard map.