We need forced balancing

[Grave_Knight]

If one team has 7 players and the other team has 2 then the game should end, the teams should be reshuffled, and the match restarted. No game should ever be 2 to 1.

[LifeupOmega]

It’s not the other team’s fault that players couldn’t commit.

[Jostabeere]

I made like 4 threads about this in the span of the last year. Half of the people tell you to “gid gut” (since one player obviously should be able to carry in a teamplay game), and half of the people say that the Casual Matchmaking will fix everything and that this thread was created 30 times already in the near past.

I totally agree with you. I had way too many 5vs7s, 4vs6s, 5vs8s, 3vs6s and so on. The game should force a balance everytime when one team gets more than 2 people than their enemies. Sadly we probably have to wait for another year or two until this happens since it obviously did not happen in the 1-2 years or BETA.

[Grave_Knight]

The whole problem with the casual matchmaking argument is that it only would work if (1) everyone was forced to use it and (2) there was leaver penalty so people wouldn’t leave. I honestly think the matchmaking system (or there lack of) is what’s really holding the game back. Wonder how many of the people who left, left because of the uneven skill levels.

[GatoCommodore]

sometimes i just quit the game when the stacked team wont press page up.

its easier that way until SD fixed the fuggen algorithm.

[Cletus_VanDamme]

lol @ gamers these days.

Take the loss and move on. That’s what the rest of us do.

[quote=“Jostabeere;212998”]

The game should force a balance everytime when one team gets more than 2 people than their enemies. [/quote]

OH yeah, that won’t cause any issues at all.

[doxjq]

Wonder how many of the people who left, left because of the uneven skill levels.

I don’t know many. I know more people who left because there was no party up with friends option.

If one team has 7 players and the other team has 2 then the game should end, the teams should be reshuffled, and the match restarted. No game should ever be 2 to 1.

I understand why you’re wanting a change, but that much change is too much. Look at how many quitters there are in pubs, and besides that what is stopping people just leaving or moving to spec when they start losing just to get a cheeky shuffle to happen. It would be abused something crazy.

[Jostabeere]

screwed up doublepost.

[Jostabeere]

[quote=“grumpyBull;213019”]lol @ gamers these days.

Take the loss and move on. That’s what the rest of us do.

The game should force a balance everytime when one team gets more than 2 people than their enemies. [/quote]

OH yeah, that won’t cause any issues at all.

I am shocked about the fact that you even think about writing that and that 2 people actually agreed with you.
I’m seriously curious how you even think about balancing uneven teams being a bad thing.
But if you’re so smart, you can tell me which issues which are bigger than an unbalanced stomp a forced balance will cause when one team is stomping the other team which has 2+ people less in their team.
Go ahead, tell me.

[Cletus_VanDamme]

So I’ll address the irrelevant comments you made first, to get them out of the way.

I don’t see where I’ve said balancing teams would be a bad thing.
This thread isn’t about which issues are bigger than unbalanced teams.

Honestly, have you even thought about your proposed solution? I’m an honest person who doesn’t really give a shit about winning or losing, I’m here to have fun and it took me an instant to see ways to exploit your solution, imagine what one of the ‘dis game is not balance, pls make fair SD’ people would do if given the opportunity to manipulate the game in the manner that you’ve suggested.

It’d be chaos, a never ending cycle of shuffles.

[royalFlag]

[quote=“grumpyBull;213072”]So I’ll address the irrelevant comments you made first, to get them out of the way.

I don’t see where I’ve said balancing teams would be a bad thing.
This thread isn’t about which issues are bigger than unbalanced teams.

Honestly, have you even thought about your proposed solution? I’m an honest person who doesn’t really give a @$!# about winning or losing, I’m here to have fun and it took me an instant to see ways to exploit your solution, imagine what one of the ‘dis game is not balance, pls make fair SD’ people would do if given the opportunity to manipulate the game in the manner that you’ve suggested.

It’d be chaos, a never ending cycle of shuffles.[/quote]

Easiest solution for this would be automatic shuffle before match even begins by how much people have made “spm”.

[Jostabeere]

[quote=“grumpyBull;213072”]So I’ll address the irrelevant comments you made first, to get them out of the way.

I don’t see where I’ve said balancing teams would be a bad thing.
This thread isn’t about which issues are bigger than unbalanced teams.

Honestly, have you even thought about your proposed solution? I’m an honest person who doesn’t really give a @$!# about winning or losing, I’m here to have fun and it took me an instant to see ways to exploit your solution, imagine what one of the ‘dis game is not balance, pls make fair SD’ people would do if given the opportunity to manipulate the game in the manner that you’ve suggested.

It’d be chaos, a never ending cycle of shuffles.[/quote]

You seem to oversee a thing. I don’t hate losing either. When it’s a fair lose because the enemy team was better. What I don’t like, and don’t accept is when I am forced to lose because I play with a team which has 2-3 people less than my enemies. I’m not a super uber pro, and cannot carry, let’s say 2 teammates against 5 people alone. And I or someone else should not carry a team with few people alone. This is a teamplay game. That’s why we have different teamplay roles. That’s why both teams should have a fair chance to win, and not get stomped because the enemies highly outnumber them.
And only a handful of people who end up on this stomping side actually are nice enough to balance out and switch teams. And because players alone can’t switch teams and balance it out by themselves, the game should do it.
Your analogy can be applied to cheaters aswell.
“Why do we need an an ticheat that kicks and bans cheaters from games, when we have a kickvote? Players can do it on their own and kick cheaters. Or you just move on when you get stomped by a kid with an aimbot”

[Madonna]

Once again we need to look back at wolfenstein:
So we get a first warning looking like: Teams look uneven, can someone from Jackal move to CDA?
When 1 minute has passed since the warning the game will autobalance teams moving players by his own.
ofcourse Only on pubs

[Cletus_VanDamme]

[quote=“Jostabeere;213077”][quote=“grumpyBull;213072”]So I’ll address the irrelevant comments you made first, to get them out of the way.

I don’t see where I’ve said balancing teams would be a bad thing.
This thread isn’t about which issues are bigger than unbalanced teams.

Honestly, have you even thought about your proposed solution? I’m an honest person who doesn’t really give a @$!# about winning or losing, I’m here to have fun and it took me an instant to see ways to exploit your solution, imagine what one of the ‘dis game is not balance, pls make fair SD’ people would do if given the opportunity to manipulate the game in the manner that you’ve suggested.

It’d be chaos, a never ending cycle of shuffles.[/quote]

You seem to oversee a thing. I don’t hate losing either. When it’s a fair lose because the enemy team was better. What I don’t like, and don’t accept is when I am forced to lose because I play with a team which has 2-3 people less than my enemies. I’m not a super uber pro, and cannot carry, let’s say 2 teammates against 5 people alone. And I or someone else should not carry a team with few people alone. This is a teamplay game. That’s why we have different teamplay roles. That’s why both teams should have a fair chance to win, and not get stomped because the enemies highly outnumber them.
And only a handful of people who end up on this stomping side actually are nice enough to balance out and switch teams. And because players alone can’t switch teams and balance it out by themselves, the game should do it.
Your analogy can be applied to cheaters aswell.
“Why do we need an an ticheat that kicks and bans cheaters from games, when we have a kickvote? Players can do it on their own and kick cheaters. Or you just move on when you get stomped by a kid with an aimbot”[/quote]

Honestly TL:DR m8.

Again, your proposed solution is flawed in many ways, and would cause (a lot) more problems than it would solve.

[Jostabeere]

Can you name one problem that a forced balance would do when one team has 6 players and the other 4? You said it 2 times already that it will cause more problems, and that people will exploit it, yet you’re unable to name a clear example.

[Szakalot]

the easiest solution:
whenever teams are different by >2players, the higher player team has
a LIMBO-QUEUE : ensuring that the smaller team never has less players on the map, with all players alive. dead players from the larger team can’t spawn unless one of their teammates dies.

this makes the game fair while not punishing anyone specifically (by forcing them to switch team) and also encourages someone from the higher count team to switch (so that they can play, rather than wait in queue).

[Dr_Plantboss]

It’s not the other team’s fault that players couldn’t commit.

Actually it’s only the players who quitted’s fault. neither team is responsible.

Something that someone posted a while back was an idea for an autobalance system. The proposed idea was: The person with the lowest score would be moved to the other team in the event of a 2-player difference between teams.

[HammerOfDawn21]

[left]When one team is outnumbered, autobalance is necessary cause vote shuffles almost always fail.

Let’s just say CDA is outnumbered 4 to 8

Maybe instead of shuffling whole teams it can just switch 2 random people from Jackal to CDA or if possible last 2 people who joined the match and give them like 2 xp for their inconvenience.[/left]

[doxjq]

Can you name one problem that a forced balance would do when one team has 6 players and the other 4? You said it 2 times already that it will cause more problems, and that people will exploit it, yet you’re unable to name a clear example.

1. Game ending soon -> People realise they’re gonna lose -> So they quit, forcing a shuffle, and some poor buggers are put onto the losing team when it’s 100% impossible for them to win as there isn’t enough time left.

2. People troll it, by realising they’re gonna lose -> Move to spec, forcing a shuffle to get even numbers, then just insta-join the team that is going to win.

[Jostabeere]

[quote=“Jostabeere;213084”]Can you name one problem that a forced balance would do when one team has 6 players and the other 4? You said it 2 times already that it will cause more problems, and that people will exploit it, yet you’re unable to name a clear example.

1. Game ending soon -> People realise they’re gonna lose -> So they quit, forcing a shuffle, and some poor buggers are put onto the losing team when it’s 100% impossible for them to win as there isn’t enough time left.

2. People troll it, by realising they’re gonna lose -> Move to spec, forcing a shuffle to get even numbers, then just insta-join the team that is going to win.[/quote]

When wins or loses are obviously not important, as stated by people here, a lose with the last 4+ minutes being better game than a one-sided stomp is still better than nothing.

The spectator modes need a total rework, and that issue could be solved somehow.

Or we get a thing which @Szakalot suggested. (That was already suggested multiple times aswell a long time ago).
The best 1-3 players end up in an infinite respawn timer if they don’t switch.
One way or the other, there has to be done something about imbalanced games.