The number of people who have voted for options besides "Whichever team is the best" is laughable. A more accurate poll would be... if you can't join the better (stacked) team do you: a) Join the weaker team and play scout / be useless till the map ends. b) Join spec and talk about whatever MOOtant broke in this version. c) Rage quit for 20 minutes. d) Grief the weaker team.
Well, Spectator is a choice. And, since autobalance isn't technically a team ( :mad: <- nerd rage) that's where I'm going.
psychology 101 fail i actually always join the team that lost last match, or is losing (i determine this by minimap controle) i dont play to win this game, that gets boring pretty quick, some of the most fun games ever is on the losing team edit: adding to it that i sometimes even switch over to the losing team cause winning is boring
What team I join also really depends on how organised that team is. I preffer a losing organised and competent team over a badly organised and incompetent but winning team anytime. I find it way more fun to play on a competent team that has a decent commander and organised squads, even if that means I am joining the losing side. I have had epic games when playing on the losing side, including epic last stands and rushes that in the end sometimes won us the game. The feeling of winning against all odds is prefferable over a mediocre victory with a badly organised and chaotic team with an incompetent commander.
I find it pretty ridicule that a team with a competent commander and an organised squad system would be losing in the first place against retard comm and retard players
i sometimes join to anti-stack, i sometimes join to my clanmates, etc... etc... but mostly BE (i like the models), but i try to avoid stacking mostly because i enjoy balanced games
I usually auto-assign, but if I had to choose it would easily be space nazi's. I mean, come on? How could you not.....
Having a r-tard comm at the beginning of the game or being griefed a few times can cause that to happen. Also, I have seen plenty of times where teams where stacked but where the enemy team was so badly organised(including having over 9000 lonewolfs) that they still lost to a team that, altough maybe was not that good when it comes to 1 vs 1, were much more competent in general as they actualy worked together, had a decent comm, organised squads and and actual battle plan.