And another thread about goddamn forced balance

(Ritobasu) #21

[quote=“C_Drive;110431”]Slightly deviating from autobalance, but it’s in the realm of balancing teams anyways.

I get really annoyed when 2 people are obviously playing together and 1 of the 2 people goes spectate as soon as the game starts and waits for somebody to join the team that is now 1 person down so they can then join their friend. I recognize there’s no party system, and you want to play with friends, but it both throws off the initial team balancing, regardless of how bad it is, and it instantly puts 1 of the teams behind by a player for x amount of time, and then by 2 players while the person who just joined is loading in while the player who spectated hops on to his buddy’s team, and then back to behind by a player for y amount of time until another player joins. Usually, the players that do this are also somewhat competent, so the teams frequently get stacked this way as well.

Is it really that bad to play a few games against each other? Friendly competition only kills the weakest of friendships.[/quote]
Why would you blame friends who just want to play together? Blame the matchmaking system for not allowing them to join a team together on a server

(Dog) #22

[quote=“Ritobasu;110438”][quote=“C_Drive;110431”]Slightly deviating from autobalance, but it’s in the realm of balancing teams anyways.

I get really annoyed when 2 people are obviously playing together and 1 of the 2 people goes spectate as soon as the game starts and waits for somebody to join the team that is now 1 person down so they can then join their friend. I recognize there’s no party system, and you want to play with friends, but it both throws off the initial team balancing, regardless of how bad it is, and it instantly puts 1 of the teams behind by a player for x amount of time, and then by 2 players while the person who just joined is loading in while the player who spectated hops on to his buddy’s team, and then back to behind by a player for y amount of time until another player joins. Usually, the players that do this are also somewhat competent, so the teams frequently get stacked this way as well.

Is it really that bad to play a few games against each other? Friendly competition only kills the weakest of friendships.[/quote]
Why would you blame friends who just want to play together? Blame the matchmaking system for not allowing them to join a team together on a server[/quote]

I don’t blame them for wanting to play together. I play with friends all the time. But it’s not the end of the world if you play a few games against each other. And since the method to play with each other typically results in imbalance, and there’s no other method that’s consistent to get to play with each other, I can only hope to dissuade the impulse to always be on the same team.

(watsyurdeal) #23

[quote=“Ritobasu;110438”][quote=“C_Drive;110431”]Slightly deviating from autobalance, but it’s in the realm of balancing teams anyways.

I get really annoyed when 2 people are obviously playing together and 1 of the 2 people goes spectate as soon as the game starts and waits for somebody to join the team that is now 1 person down so they can then join their friend. I recognize there’s no party system, and you want to play with friends, but it both throws off the initial team balancing, regardless of how bad it is, and it instantly puts 1 of the teams behind by a player for x amount of time, and then by 2 players while the person who just joined is loading in while the player who spectated hops on to his buddy’s team, and then back to behind by a player for y amount of time until another player joins. Usually, the players that do this are also somewhat competent, so the teams frequently get stacked this way as well.

Is it really that bad to play a few games against each other? Friendly competition only kills the weakest of friendships.[/quote]
Why would you blame friends who just want to play together? Blame the matchmaking system for not allowing them to join a team together on a server[/quote]

This

No offense guys but people who want to play with their friends SHOULD be able to on a public server.

You guys want perfectly balanced matches where it’s a fair fight? Well, unfortunately that’s not going to happen because all the skill in the world can’t make up for lack of good tactics and team work. You guys need to work together to win, not just expect balancing to do everything.

You can have teams in competitive even, matched perfectly well based on skill, but there still has to be a loser and a winner, and it all comes down to who plays better under the pressure.

The only real solution I see for pubs, is a few things

  • Proving ground servers, where level 1-10 play together only
  • Normal servers, nobody below level 10 is allowed
  • Solo servers, same as before, but no parties allowed, only single players

But this may divide the community even MORE than it already has been, so it’s not a real solution at all. It just creates more room for people to complain because if the game doesn’t go exactly how they expect they will call it a balancing issue, when 9 times out of 10 it is PLAYER issues.

Personally, I think a bigger fish to fry is competitive mode, and giving people reasons to pick it up and play. This whole pub balancing thing is getting way out of hand.

(MarsRover) #24

[quote=“MarsRover;110380”]One team smaller by 2 or more?

  • after 30 seconds: offer an incentive to switch. Some credits, bonus XP, a chance for second case, whatever works. Limited to 1 per game per player to limit farming.
  • if still the case after 60 seconds: autoshuffle.

Better to offer a carrot first, and the stick second.[/quote]

Addendum - it doesn’t have to be a full shuffle. This mechanism should try to minimize team switches. It may be enough to switch 1 player to make 6v4 a balanced 5v5.

(Szakalot) #25

I consider it a common misconception. Imo, the majority of teh time one team stomps the other because they have better aimers. One/two good players that can consistently score multikills and basically outplay the entire enemy team are the cause of one sided games, not some elusive ‘teamwork’. Teamwork only comes into play when teams are actually close in skill. This is because random pubbers have almost no sense of teamplay.

Throwing ammo/hp at friendlies is not teamwork, setting up crossfires, covering each other, pushing together - thats teamwork in DB.

(Blackers) #26

As bad as this is, and it does ruin a game. I think we need a party system in place too, Since most people swap teams in order to be on the same team as their friends. and also, more higher level servers, since most people will swap to avoid a team full of 5- rank players. swapping would be discouraged if we automatically got teamed with friends, and separate the servers for new players from the experienced a bit more.

Then have an auto balance in place

(Amerika) #27

[quote=“Szakalot;110464”][quote=“Watsyurdeal;110444”]
You guys want perfectly balanced matches where it’s a fair fight? Well, unfortunately that’s not going to happen because all the skill in the world can’t make up for lack of good tactics and team work. You guys need to work together to win, not just expect balancing to do everything.

[/quote]

I consider it a common misconception. Imo, the majority of teh time one team stomps the other because they have better aimers. One/two good players that can consistently score multikills and basically outplay the entire enemy team are the cause of one sided games, not some elusive ‘teamwork’. Teamwork only comes into play when teams are actually close in skill. This is because random pubbers have almost no sense of teamplay.

Throwing ammo/hp at friendlies is not teamwork, setting up crossfires, covering each other, pushing together - thats teamwork in DB.[/quote]

Yup. You can have a server that has mostly nearly same skilled players going against each other…but then you throw in that one guy that can easily drop 50-70 players per side and suddenly you get a huge imbalance. And there is no way for a server to account for that. The only time it does is when that player gets a bunch of newer players on their team compared to the other which can then, in turn, result in a stomp because the one guy can’t carry that much.

It will never be perfect. But having options that at least tries is a good thing IMO.

(Jostabeere) #28

[quote=“Izzy;110369”][quote=“Szakalot;110355”][quote=“Izzy;110348”]Says the guy who flamed me because I played proxy and placed mine during a fight. If you were kind on servers and ask politely, people would tend to help (just use the foot in the door concept).

If you keep whining and being a dick, well, blame yourself.[/quote]

your personal drama with the OP has no bearing into the point he is making, which is that forced balances is necessary in pubs[/quote]
Asking people politely if one could change side would be better perceived.

I faced it myself. When someone politely ask like ‘Can someone please change team to help us’, I feel like to do it. If you just launch something like: ‘OMG, another fkn unbalanced game’, then the answer of the enemy team will be obvious. That’s just about mentality.

Now this game is in beta, which means you can help people to grow a nice mentality by not being a dick yourself, from the start. If people get use to ask politely, it will grow like that. If we allow bad behaviour from the start, the community will turn bad.[/quote]

You’re lvl 26. And you’re a giant selfish dick if you need to be asked politely to balance a game. “Oh yeah, I’m important, ask me or get spawnraped, I’m your god now.”.
I hate Proxy and dislike everyone who player her. Period. [spoiler]You played the lamest mechanic this game has: Running into a group of enemies and spamming 1-2 mines while doing kamikazi. This is broken gameplay imo and shouldn’t be in this game. Everyone who uses it is exploiting a broken mechanic.[/spoiler]
Being upset about this doesn’t change the fact you did a hot dump on the balance and continued playing a 4vs7.

ABout a party system. Mark people as buddies ingame, and if the game is uneven you can change someone who isn’t in this party. I hardly believe someone is playing pubs with 6-8 friends.

(HoopleDoople) #29

And yet on most pub servers I’d kill for players that were even willing to do the “throwing ammo/hp at friendlies” level of teamwork. But yes, I agree with your point that true teamwork is almost never found in pubs, even when players are grouped.

(Izzy) #30

[quote=“Jostabeere;110493”]

You’re lvl 26. And you’re a giant selfish dick if you need to be asked politely to balance a game. “Oh yeah, I’m important, ask me or get spawnraped, I’m your god now.”.
I hate Proxy and dislike everyone who player her. Period. [spoiler]You played the lamest mechanic this game has: Running into a group of enemies and spamming 1-2 mines while doing kamikazi. This is broken gameplay imo and shouldn’t be in this game. Everyone who uses it is exploiting a broken mechanic.[/spoiler]
Being upset about this doesn’t change the fact you did a hot dump on the balance and continued playing a 4vs7.[/quote]

I shouldn’t replied to that, that’s pointless and truly off-topic this time (free agression) but I guess anyone needs to defend himself.

  1. I am level 26, and?
  2. If someone is a dick to me, I won’t help him, basic social aspect. If someone ask politely, I help. Where’s the problem? Where did you find arrogance in that?
  3. I always play agressively, and end up in bad situation with proxy. Either I die pointlessly, or I die with 2 or more enemies with me including the one defusing the bomb.
    Case closed to me
  4. The game 4vs7 you mentioned wasn’t with me, I quit earlier at the end of my missions. If not, please MP me the full screen with names.
(DeadAlive) #31

In Quake Wars, players would see a message pop up offering them X amount of xp to switch to the team with fewer players. I switched more times than I could count via that method. Not only is it rewarding, but you don’t have to monitor the situation yourself. If no one accepted the offer, then the auto balancer would force someone to switch.

I think that is the best way, although in this game the bonus could include credits as well, such as 2500xp and 200 credits to switch. The player should also be granted the first win bonus automatically in this case so long as they finish the match.

Each individual player would not be getting this offer very often, so we wouldn’t all be getting rich or anything. Limiters could be implemented to prevent abusive leavers/joiners trying to exploit the bonuses.

As for a party system, I’m surprised they don’t already have something like that, given that team imbalances are a top complaint in FPS games.

(bontsa) #32

[quote=“MarsRover;110450”][quote=“MarsRover;110380”]One team smaller by 2 or more?

  • after 30 seconds: offer an incentive to switch. Some credits, bonus XP, a chance for second case, whatever works. Limited to 1 per game per player to limit farming.
  • if still the case after 60 seconds: autoshuffle.

Better to offer a carrot first, and the stick second.[/quote]

Addendum - it doesn’t have to be a full shuffle. This mechanism should try to minimize team switches. It may be enough to switch 1 player to make 6v4 a balanced 5v5.[/quote]

Just before stuff gets sidetracked, quoting and +1-ing this so hard.

Why do we not have a clear “Number inbalance” notification etc when either of the sides is missing 2 or more players? We have humongous alert for AFK idle kick warning, which cannot be visually missed unless one of your parents is a mole (in which case I would love to chat more with you since I’m highly intrigued of genetics). It is somewhat ironic, since it’s idle warning, most of the people getting it will not even see it due being Away From the Keyboard. Why do we not have such for situation that could be correctable by player’s themselves? I think I can speak on quite a many player’s behalf that its not always clear as day to notice 2 player difference unless situation is falling into spawncamping. Not everyone is glued to the scoreboard checking it every 5 seconds, so it’d be nice to get said notification before stuff is getting infernal and resulting in even more ragequitting.

Not everyone switches voluntarily, yea. But as many have said, give some carrot for doing so voluntarily and you also get some of those who will do it out of greed. Bad reason makes for a good cause in this case though. And it’d be good move in the long run to reward self-balancing behaviour.

Game already has coding for ranking players judging from how well they’ve performed in the last couple of games, which is done in Objective and Execution lobby screen. It shouldn’t be too hard to make balancer that quickly checks that rating of all involved and switches the most fitting candidate to help up with the balance. If none has switched voluntarily. Heck, it could even use data of current player’s squads and switch e.g. one playing somewhat well with a medic, into a team of lower playercount and getting wreck’d because they don’t have anyone with a medic.