I'd imagine a fair amount of us here have experienced at least one of those high tier games where it's a 3v3 or something slightly more. For me, personally, I loved those games. You have a much bigger responsibility. You can have a much bigger impact on the outcome. And finally, it's much more about skill level.
In the current 12v12, it's never fun to be that first ship that gets focused and burned down. In a 12v12, it's much harder to have a good push in the high tiers, because nobody wants to be that first ship that gets burned down within a minute and then go negative. We all wait for someone else to take the role of sacrificial lamb. This can easily lead to the stale games we have at high tier.
From my own experience, smaller games such as 3v3 or 5v5 that have occurred are much more fun. You definitely stick together because not doing so will surely result in defeat. There is no longer the sacrificial lamb that needs to be extended to the enemy. You are together, but you also probably won't be focused by 8 players at once and burned down within a minute.
I want to see if anyone else shares the same experiences me. Do you think we should also have smaller team random battles thrown into the mix? Or reduce the team size at high tier? This may or not be another fix to the high tier camping meta. My reasons for the high tier camping meta do in fact stem from the high repair costs (which are being reworked), but my theory is then the sacrificial lamb theory. Nobody wants to have their game cut short which then translates to a massive loss in credits. Personal experience shows me that small engagements are much more likely to end in brawls compared to a full team engagement where people simply turn around and retreat the moment they get focused.