From | Message | ||
---|---|---|---|
|
![]() Your thoughts But then i do rely on Joe and the Team Triton.. |
||
|
![]() |
||
|
![]() |
||
|
![]() more matches to make. Successive wins can cause a good rise on the ladder - but successive losses can bring the team down just as quickly. Bigger teams are a lot more work, in terms of making 10 - 15 matches daily. Large and less large or small teams all have their unique advantages. With a good strategy, modest sized teams can definitely get to #1 on the ladder a number of times. The rules of the ladder, when used effectively, can offset the difference in team sizes. Chess is one game, while match-making is another one. |
||
|
![]() The times I've said to myself, "I wish I was as good at chess as I was at starting team games." I know of a team with under 30 members that was #1 recently, very impressive by 'The Empire Strikes Back' I'm sure the pending challenges limit is at 5 to try to encourage large teams to not be too large (though thanks to open challenges I've had as many as 11 pending at once before ), but some big teams make it work, quite well in one case I've notice. I've always been amazed with how 'Peace, Love, and Bunny Rabbits' have been able to keep up as much as they have with their huge amount of players, definitely not easy I'm sure for Gameknot's largest team. The best 100+ member team I've seen keep up though with their many members is 'The Knights of the Crystal Castle', they do a great job getting all their members matches despite having so many to keep up with. Smaller teams do regularly make their way at the top though. Honestly I think if you challenge other top teams often, you stay near the top more. Of course, if every team went by that, it would be much harder to stay near the top, but at the same time it would make for some wild competition. |