Why a Funny 'Battlegrounds' Strategy Could Also Get You Banned

It's supposed to be you against 99 other people, but sometimes, it makes more sense to work together. Bad news: it's against the rules.

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://waypoint.vice.com/en_us/article/8xajxp/why-a-funny-battlegrounds-strategy-could-also-get-you-banned

Hopefully the mods follow the spirit of the law and not take these smaller cases too seriously. It makes sense to ban teaming up: solo should be 1v1, not 2v1. Two duo teams will usually win against a single team. It throws off the balance that makes the game feel fair even when you lose. I doubt many players would put up with twenty minutes of tense isolation only to be steamrolled by a team with more than twice as many people on it.

What makes the stories from the article so good is that they don’t affect anyone else. In that motorcycle clip for example, the end result is the same as if the player that got bike first had driven off, then the second player saw the other one down the road and ran over to it.

A game as community focused as Battlegrounds needs solid rules to keep things from turning into a gross mess, but going too far punishes players for innocent, spontaneous interactions.

Yeah, I don’t know if not beating another player to death really counts as “teaming up”, particularly considering how fiddly punching is in that game–something tells me those cases won’t be the ones facing bans.