  We consider team zero-sum network congestion games with $n$ senders playing
against $k$ interceptors over a graph $G$. The senders aim to minimize their
collective cost of sending messages over paths in $G$, which is an aggregation
of edge costs, while the interceptors aim to maximize the collective cost by
increasing some of these edge costs. To evade the interceptors, the senders
will usually use randomized strategies. We consider two cases, the correlated
case when senders have access to a shared source of randomness, and the
uncorrelated case, when each sender has access to only its own source of
randomness. We study the additional cost that uncorrelated senders have to
bear, specifically by comparing the costs incurred by senders in cost-minimal
Nash Equilibria when senders can and cannot share randomness.
  We prove that for an intuitive strict subset of cost functions, the ratio
between correlated and uncorrelated costs at equilibrium is
$O(\min(m_c(G),n))$, where $m_c(G)$ is the mincut size of $G$. This bound is
much milder compared to the most general case, where an upper bound of
$\Omega((m_c(G))^{n-1})$ on the ratio is known. We show that the senders can
approximate their optimal play by playing simple strategies which select paths
uniformly at random from subsets of disjoint paths. We then focus on two
natural cost functions. For the first, we prove that one of the simple
strategies above is an optimal strategy for senders over graphs with disjoint
paths. In complete contrast, for the second cost function we prove that none of
these simple strategies is optimal for the senders over these graphs, unless
the game instance admits a trivial optimal senders strategy.
