Mawai, on 22 August 2014 - 06:46 PM, said:
The main reason I can think of to NOT allow groups is the possibility of collusion to facilitate everyone reaching the goal as quickly as possible.
With 24 separate people randomly distributed into matches ... the odds of getting a lot of buddies onto your team who would be willing to fix the match to get it over with quicker are very small since some of the folks on your team will want to play to win.
Consider folks making teams of 12 man each ... not so many groups in that queue ... they sync drop against other sets of 12 mans who have an agreement to allow a particular team to win. The best choice would be assault. One team base rushes while the other just hangs out. Game over in less than 2 minutes. Rinse and repeat.
What about smaller groups? Well these groups could make a agreement about which side will win and then contribute some friendly fire. Maybe not enough to kill team mates but maybe enough to take off armor/arms/legs here and there in order to give the team that is supposed to win the advantage. This might be accomplished through sync dropping so that connected groups end up on each side of the match. In fact, if the match was limited to assault - the group on one team would only need to base rush convincing the rest to go along ... while the group on the other team wandered off taking the rest of their side with them.
Some of these may seem far-fetched but some folks would go to extreme lengths to obtain the goods from the challenge while minimizing the effort/time/grind required ... and this is all much more easily done if the challenges are open to groups.
that doesn't appear to be the reason behind it per Russ on Twitter
and as far as that goes?
I'd MUCH rather deal with that as opposed to dbags running off to suicide constantly until they get their wins