1v4? SWAT doesn't count. C'mon now. Objective based or actual team slayer games it literally never happens. If the other team is absolutely terrible, maybe in doubles, but at that point how is it a thrill knowing the other team was so shitty that you beat them 2v1/4v1/whatever? That just means every encounter wasn't a challenge anyway.
Every time this discussion comes up here, the "thrill of winning against all odds" argument shows up and it's shit every time. If I can beat the team by myself, there wasn't going to be a challenge anyway and again, we're just wasting time. I'd rather win a fair match, thank you. And I'd accomplish this by leaving and finding a new one. Or do what I usually do and go in with some semblance of a team.
Then, I just piss off heckfu and he quits and we're back where we started...
http://i.imgur.com/bDzES.gif[IMG][/QUOTE]
Before I get into my main point, once you've been quit banned one time the system goes into fubar-mode, at least in my case. I've been kicked from matches(not a betrayal, just simply booted to the MM lobby) and it said "You have quit too many games recently. You have been banned from entering matchmaking." That's why I bring up consistency of the system. Someone had a video a while back where the warning message interrupted the dude playing.
But onto my main point... The ironic thing here is that there is a section of HaloGAF that prides itself on winning unbalanced matches that they could have won by playing with their feet. And this "I'd rather win a fair match, thank you." is based on your preference. Some people couldn't give a fuck less about whether it is fair. You want the fair match no matter what.
If you're searching in Non-Arena Reach, you aren't going to find those balanced matches anymore. You also have to look at how balanced is determined by the game. Let's assign rank 1-10 to players, with 10 being the best. A match of 2, 3, 5, 10 vs. 5, 5, 5, 5 is mathematically balanced. If the first team has players 2, 3, and 5 quit, the game is skewed towards the group of four, but it would take 3 of them to take the 10 out. So if 10 can take out one or two at a time, then 10 will win the game. Note: That's just based on pure numbers, not any form of player data(which could make it higher or lower).
And juices, using the social argument works both ways. Why don't you quit if you aren't going to enjoy the 4v1? It is just social after all.
