I dont understand how the team index in forge works, can anyone explain?

teams shouldnt always be placed together... , there should be an option for it....    i see much larger problems in starting positions... sometimes,  i start with a truely horrible planet setup,  3/4 planets with maxed out militai but only 2 extractors.... then 1 and sometimes 0 neighbouing asteroids with either 2 or 3 extractors

whilst my enemy has a very nice planet setup, with 2 asteroids,  3/4 planets with minimal militia and 4 extracotrs per planet,    shouldnt something like that be fixed :/?

[EDIT]

i like reply #31 , tough some things are over-done,  like being able to choose fleet supply,   since it gives upkeep, it should remain at 0 standard,   if u need more supply, u can always upgrade it @ start

starting techs:  nice idea,  but every race has different researches at different tier's,  best example here is LRF ships,  vasari start at tier 1, tec at tier 2 and advent at tier 3,, i dont think this can ever be truly balanced....

disabled techs:   great idea,  finaly able to disable techs u do not want in your game (superweaopons) tough.. again racial techs interfere it'll be hard to balance and you'll always have those people that will disable a weak tech from themselfs and disable a very strong tech for the enemy (i.e games with disabled culture spreaders???   means advent have a big weakness and cannot get some seriously neat civilain technology's (culture spying etc.)... superweaopon

best way to balance this would be to only be able to disable certain techs,  like tech tier 8 = disabled, but even then it wouldnt be quite fair

so the absolute best way to balance would be superweaopons on/off   ,would be cool to implemend,,,

recource rates can already be set to low/medium/high, 

I completely agree and wonder why this has taken so long? This is really a showstopper for competitive play.

Hell why not make a giant standard database in which the devs release the maps. The maps are chosen by votes on the forums.

If team don't start together or can be spread evenly what is the point of team games...   for such an good game.. it's only a small fix to make the game awesome..

I agree , the random positions makes for variety , especially if you play 2-3 games everyday.

And that's fine and all... as an option.  Starting by team members is kind of a must for teambased RTS.

I dont think we should add the feature of Side v Side.

If we add the option , then nobody will "not" use the option.

Whenever I get a Side v Side game out of random , Im like Wow  cool nice this is gonna be ace . Its nice because you feel safe , or your atleast as safe as the other team and your all together.

However if every game started out Side v Side , id be bored of this game by now . I used to say we should have the option , but sometimes its better to force everyone to not have the option , because people will start to indulge and spoil themselves till they get bored. And...remember its the hosts decision , so sometimes it WILL be annoying if your bored of Side v Side , but he wants it because its his first game of the day , but you have played 3 Side v Side games already so you dont want it.

The other thing to note - in a side vs side game, quite often the flank guys are LESS safe then if they are intermixed - they have 2 or 3 guys coming for them, rather then just 1 (sometimes 2 depending on the map)

It can already be addressed in the map design.  If you design a custom map using Galaxy Forge, you can pinpoint a team's starting locations.  They just need to release multiple versions of the standard maps with different starting locations.