I mean, it still doesn't take away for the fact that teaming increases chances of winning by a lot? as I said, minerware teaming is also arguable, but that's a different discussion for which I have my own opinion which is quite similar to Eli's.@Blom I just want to point out my quote is more based on minerware and how teaming is actually just worst on minerware than on pillar of fortune as it does majorly change the game and unlike Pillar of Fortune, you have to wait for the game to end. Where in pillar of fortune, if you die then that's it, you can just go to a different game.
I wonder if adding a duo mode would solve this problem though, and I wonder how a duo mode would work.
I don't want to take your quotes out of perspective but I think in both perspectives it implies the exact same.
Lucky Islands has a very high predictability. Not a 100% one, but it is equally unlikely to get a sharpness 3 diamond sword over 3 shulkers for example. Obviously, not every game is the same, and there will be randomness, but tactics like jumping down immediately, building up directly or waiting for someone to jump on you are all valid tactics, no matter what items you are handed.As long as I can't predict when a player will get an ender dragon spawn egg or some other stuff like that, that's a no. As long as there is an element of complete randomness with this much impact, that's a no.
Isn't this the inherent point? Getting an unfair advantage over other people? The objective you are stating is "you vs death", but teaming turns it into "you vs environment + 3 friends with you as bounty". I am curious about what your view is on the harm done to the casual players in regards to the little more fun players can have by eliminating the other people first and only to secure them a win.with there being nothing wrong with it other than the fact it gets very irritating to the players who are not in those parties.