let people choose their own teams and play with their friends on objective public

(Protekt1) #21

The reason that happens is so everyone can load your skins and mercs being played, according to the devs.

(f34n0r) #22

Seems to be a lot of confusion here. The poll options aren’t biased and here’s why. Here are the facts:

Every objective match I have played since the patch, immediately after starting, I see at least 2-4 people go into spectator mode and sit there waiting to switch to the team they wanted to be on, or I see people quitting and trying to come back so they can change their merc loadout. Then after they do that, other people wind up quitting/switching because they realize that their loadouts were affected (not enough medics, skyhammers, engineers, etc.) It’s a chain reaction.

It’s wasting the match starts and often winds up with the first objective going down with all the chaos of team switching and rejoining.

As to polls, it is absolutely a representative sample. That’s what polls are. Now, we can argue about the margin of error but at 85%+ it’s not even worth discussing.

At the very least we should all be able to agree that forcing people to blindly go in not knowing if they are offense or defense and not knowing what kind of loadouts their teammates have is crazy. In a perfect world it would force everyone to carry one engineer, one medic and one ballistic damage class just to be safe, and when people inevitably fail to do that it will resort in continued chaos.

In the end this comes down to freedom of choice. Do you support letting people choose how and what they play or not? Homefront had a system like this, it was a disaster.

(ZGToRRent) #23

I voted No because on current situation with ‘public’ ‘servers’, something need to be done to improve balance.

(Szakalot) #24

i have only seen one person go spec at beginning of map, so not sure where you’re playing, doesn’t apply to my area (EU)

(FireWorks) #25

[ ]Yes!
[x]Yea!

“Look! Noone voted No, so it must be great!”

Sorry, dude but your vote is so rigged, dictators would be proud.

The way this was made, you discredited even the slightest bit of a valid point.

(f34n0r) #26

[QUOTE=FireWorks;538845][ ]Yes!
[x]Yea!

“Look! Noone voted No, so it must be great!”

Sorry, dude but your vote is so rigged, dictators would be proud.

The way this was made, you discredited even the slightest bit of a valid point.[/QUOTE]

Pretty ironic. Not letting people choose their own teams is what is truly dictatorial, if anything is.

(Protekt1) #27

Very often when people themselves recognize that they don’t have a really compelling factual based argument, they try to apply to emotions instead.

And your collection of facts regarding people going to spectator etc., are contrary to my experience. I haven’t seen that happen yet and I watched for it last I was on. It sounds like people need to get used to the idea that they can’t pick 3 hardcore defensive or offensive options. Not really a problem. I don’t even see the mercs being that lopsided anyway, especially in casual play.

If you’re wondering why there might be confusion, it might be because your whack voting options. This issue could also be alleviated by other solutions rather than letting you choose your team. But your poll doesn’t include any other solutions and is extremely narrow in choices. I suggested they lock people out from going into spectate in order to try and stack teams or switch sides unnecessarily.

Balanced teams has been probably the biggest issue this game has had since even before open beta launched. It isn’t something that is going to solve itself either. This is one way they’ve opted to try to fix it.

How about we make a poll that says:
Would you rather have:
A. balanced teams by stopping team stacking in the lobby

or

B. never play a match with balanced teams again

(f34n0r) #28

[QUOTE=Protekt1;538848]Very often when people themselves recognize that they don’t have a really compelling factual based argument, they try to apply to emotions instead.

And your collection of facts regarding people going to spectator etc., are contrary to my experience. I haven’t seen that happen yet and I watched for it last I was on. It sounds like people need to get used to the idea that they can’t pick 3 hardcore defensive or offensive options. Not really a problem. I don’t even see the mercs being that lopsided anyway, especially in casual play.

If you’re wondering why there might be confusion, it might be because your whack voting options. This issue could also be alleviated by other solutions rather than letting you choose your team. But your poll doesn’t include any other solutions and is extremely narrow in choices. I suggested they lock people out from going into spectate in order to try and stack teams or switch sides unnecessarily.

Balanced teams has been probably the biggest issue this game has had since even before open beta launched. It isn’t something that is going to solve itself either. This is one way they’ve opted to try to fix it.

How about we make a poll that says:
Would you rather have:
A. balanced teams by stopping team stacking in the lobby

or

B. never play a match with balanced teams again[/QUOTE]

Your solution is more loss of freedom. Now you don’t want people to be even able to spec or switch teams at all. That will kill db even faster. I brought up homefront because it is a good case study in the lifecycle of a game with similar problems and how fast that community died should be demonstrative of cause and effect. It’s not emotion, it’s pure data.

Gamers love freedom. Gamers love choices. Taking away choices makes something unappealing and then those gamers leave.

(montheponies) #29

Poll is clearly biased, it’s not a neutral question or set of responses. There is also some vague idea that you can get some response bias to Yes/No’s…

Anyway, my two main frustrations with public games (SW or Obj) previously were time it takes between matches (losing entire server not unheard of) and no one bothering to try and let the auto-balance work - ie. best pals / clan mates team stacking.

So both of these points have been mitigated slightly by the change, so it gets an initial thumbs up from me (i also prefer the UI). Bear in mind still open beta so good time to try things out?

(Protekt1) #30

[QUOTE=f34n0r;538849]Your solution is more loss of freedom. Now you don’t want people to be even able to spec or switch teams at all. That will kill db even faster. I brought up homefront because it is a good case study in the lifecycle of a game with similar problems and how fast that community died should be demonstrative of cause and effect. It’s not emotion, it’s pure data.

Gamers love freedom. Gamers love choices. Taking away choices makes something unappealing and then those gamers leave.[/QUOTE]

I said it would only stop people from joining spectator from a player slot for a minute or two at the beginning. Not that no one can join spectator ever or from menu. And spectator is barely needed as it is in CASUAL servers. We’re not talking about ranked here or anything that makes spectator mode actually important anyway.

Also, how do you persist to claim your opinion represents everybodies after I’ve already pointed out that it doesn’t. “gamers love freedom” etc… You represent only your opinion. And to that point, gamers will leave and likely have left because of uneven teams. That is a very consistent complaint I have read.

BTW, homefront was a pretty crappy game to begin with. Claiming your opinion is just “pure data”… wow. You’re just delusional. It appears I am wasting my time with someone who doesn’t understand what data actually is. I guess it explains everything you’ve said though.

(f34n0r) #31

So I’m delusional now eh? I guess those other 120+ people who voted “yes” are delusional too.

nK4Mz9z.png328x621

Those 8,000 players who left dirty bomb after all the unwanted changes over time must be delusional too. How about we revisit in 3-6 months and see where we are?

In the stock market, we call something like that a trend.

(Loki.) #32

How anyone at SD thought this was a good idea is beyond me…

Makes you wonder what happened to the team behind W:ET and ETQW, did they all quit or something?

(edxot) #33

sorry about the off-topic, but i need to say something to someone:

thanks f34n0r, this will put a smile in my face, for years to came.

(Rémy Cabresin) #34

I’m still wondering why people actually choose mercs based on attack or defense in public, why not just play for the missions and if no missions the mercs you enjoy playing? If you’re that hung on performing why not play MM :confused: You get all the prep time in the world there, you can even choose which maps you queue BEFORE you go into a lobby :open_mouth:

(FireWorks) #35

[QUOTE=f34n0r;538859]So I’m delusional now eh? I guess those other 120+ people who voted “yes” are delusional too.

nK4Mz9z.png328x621

Those 8,000 players who left dirty bomb after all the unwanted changes over time must be delusional too. How about we revisit in 3-6 months and see where we are?

In the stock market, we call something like that a trend.[/QUOTE]

The decrease to 30% of the initial peak is pretty normal for any f2p game. Actually a lot have dropped by far more. On release/opening/etc ten thousands of players download it and lose interest after a few days to weeks, if they even judge a game to be worth look for more than a few minutes. This is, again a pretty weak statistic you show us there.

The huge peak after open beta release stems from the great review some popular Youtuber made.

Do you know what confirmation bias is? You might want to look it up.

(Protekt1) #36

[QUOTE=f34n0r;538859]So I’m delusional now eh? I guess those other 120+ people who voted “yes” are delusional too.

nK4Mz9z.png328x621

Those 8,000 players who left dirty bomb after all the unwanted changes over time must be delusional too. How about we revisit in 3-6 months and see where we are?

In the stock market, we call something like that a trend.[/QUOTE]

Funny how your graph tries to lead someone to believe that the drop in players happened right after the phantom update when it happened nearly a month after. A month where there were no content updates and many other issues including cheaters. But of course you want people to believe phantom was the cause and that is where your agenda is completely obvious. You literally are unable to present information without appearing biased because you are.

edit:
Also hilarious how many votes from non-accounts there are in this poll. An extremely abnormal account. It is clear that you’re voting yes to make it appear as if there is a ton of extra support for your position.

(ailmanki) #37

Haven’t played since long DB, enjoying ET quite much…
But I am curious, does that mean if I want to join the same team with a friend of mine, that is pure luck, if we end up in same team? It was already not trivial to get on same server. ?!

Seriously if that is the case, please reconsider SD. Is that really what you guys would want to play in your free time?
Is that the casual game of the future - I really doubt it.
All the more I don’t see any true professional player playing this, unless big prizes are offered.

If it was to better test the balancing stuff, to force certain things, that would be fine; but why not announce it as such - Therefor, this seems another change which is not going to be reverted.

(BioSnark) #38

I’d need to see some stats on how this has changed average game balance before having an opinion since I only know the downside of the change.

Obviously, should be an option on community servers.

(Glottis-3D) #39

bb, objective mode, all hail SW!!!

(Loki.) #40

Reality, change hasnt made a difference.
Match after match last night, regardless of the server.
Peeps just jumped into spec and then joined the same team…

in a 2+hr span, only a handful of matches could be considered ‘close’ the rest we just per rape fests…