What's the point in calling votes? this game is unplayable.

(devolved) #1

I tried playing a few games the other night, and in 6 matches every match on each different modes, servers, ppl size had all lvl 40 to lvl 90 on one team and the other team had lvl 1-10.

I just played today and the exactly same thing, except I played 3 matches again on different servers and all 3 matches had the highest lvls on one side, and then lvl 1-10 on my team.

How is it possible that every single match was like this.

You vote to balance teams and it’s immediately shut down.

Do you have to invest 8 hours just to get 1 or 2 matches that aren’t like this.

This game a few months ago was not that bad.

(BananaSlug) #2

few months ago almost everyone was new to the game

(MilkyBear) #3

You played stop watch ?

(Borganism) #4

Also, they are working on it. Thats what the change to casual matchmaking is meant to help fix

(PewPewSkittles) #5

Just guilt trip the high level players for being so good that they’ll either switch or leave. =P

(Yoma) #6

Well, balance is an awesome thing.

However, just because someone is high level it doesnt mean that he plays serious and or level ~10 can also be on par because some higher level player play the game for a while but not much.

For the rest, wait for MM, then you can cry about that because it aint gonna balance things perfectly either.

(ImSploosh) #7

[quote=“Yoma;196320”]Well, balance is an awesome thing.

However, just because someone is high level it doesnt mean that he plays serious and or level ~10 can also be on par because some higher level player play the game for a while but not much.

For the rest, wait for MM, then you can cry about that because it aint gonna balance things perfectly either.[/quote]

Not only that, but MM will also have a variety of other issues. Although I’d like more balanced matches, I think MM isn’t going to be any better considering the problems that come along with it.

As for the current balance, some games are terrible, but there’s still a lot of balanced games. You just got unlucky.

(jokingShale) #8

Levels can’t be used for balance. They aren’t a good measure of anything in the first place, before you even consider how they can be abused. Which is, if SD started using levels as a balancing factor, people would just play with their new level 1 smurf instead. Instead of that level 80 redeye with 60k score owning everyone, you’d have a level 3 aura with 60k score owning everyone.

(Szakalot) #9

this

(Wolf_Darkrose) #10

[quote=“devolved;31578”]I tried playing a few games the other night, and in 6 matches every match on each different modes, servers, ppl size had all lvl 40 to lvl 90 on one team and the other team had lvl 1-10.

I just played today and the exactly same thing, except I played 3 matches again on different servers and all 3 matches had the highest lvls on one side, and then lvl 1-10 on my team.

How is it possible that every single match was like this.

You vote to balance teams and it’s immediately shut down.

Do you have to invest 8 hours just to get 1 or 2 matches that aren’t like this.

This game a few months ago was not that bad.
[/quote]

funny rank really doesnt matter in any game … im still a rank 8 and i can pub stomp as good as a rank 40 its all on loadout and skill… plus if your team can even hold back those vets that takes balls

(Dysfnal) #11

Wait what? Rank doesn’t matter in ANY game? I’ve been playing RPGs wrong my entire life

(ImSploosh) #12

Agree and disagree. People often say that level doesn’t matter, but it does. Disregarding smurf accounts, if you were to balance each game according to level (basically time played), the balance would be much better than it currently is. Level=more experience=skill. Of course it doesn’t translate directly, but the majority of people get much better as they play the game more and therefore will almost always stomp the newbies.

Granted you have the occasional level 80 who just happened to abuse a bug or boost there way up that high, or maybe they’re just not good at shooters and played a lot so they’re not a great player. But you need to think about the majority here. Generally speaking, the higher the level, the more skill one has- but there are exceptions!

Also, I’m speaking from the perspective of higher levels, not the slight differences between a level 10 and level 20. Let’s say you have 6 people level 5-10 and 6 people level 30-40; if you were to balance a game like this:
Level 6
Level 8
Level 10
Level 34
Level 36
Level 39

Total Level=133

and

Level 5
Level 7
Level 9
Level 35
Level 37
Level 40

Total Level=133

This game would be pretty well balanced and I’m sure it would be a much closer game as compared to the current balancing system. I know it’s not perfect and there are issues, but I’m just speaking from a general standpoint.

(Mister__Wiggles) #13

rank in dirty bomb is experience and just that. Im a level 54 and I never take any game I play seriously, I rather go around and have fun. Every game will have try hards and people like me who just want to have a laugh. My point being, level is just one factor in a massive amount of possibilities, aim, SPM, KD, last 5 games, time with a certain merc, kills with that merc, etc. There is so much that needs to go through a filter to get you that ONE perfectly balanced game it is basically impossible because even when it gets all those factors right you cant count for the human factor. This game will never be balanced, could it improve though? Yeah sure it could, will SD actually put that much time into? Now that I can’t say, we have to see what this new system is like and a proper read up on how it judges the player skill level and so on.

(jokingShale) #14

I disagree with this. The current system of balancing games according to average score per minute and win/loss over the past 25 games played is a much better measure of how useful a player is to any team they end up in.

Changing that to balancing according to levels wouldn’t do anything to improve the situation. The reasons why imbalanced games exist would still be there. People would still play worse some days and better other days. They would still rage quit and swap teams and stack without a care, throwing the games out of balance. Games balanced according to levels wouldn’t be any more balanced than they are now, if anything there would be a small decrease in skill balance.

(ImSploosh) #15

I disagree with this. The current system of balancing games according to average score per minute and win/loss over the past 25 games played is a much better measure of how useful a player is to any team they end up in.

Changing that to balancing according to levels wouldn’t do anything to improve the situation. The reasons why imbalanced games exist would still be there. People would still play worse some days and better other days. They would still rage quit and swap teams and stack without a care, throwing the games out of balance. Games balanced according to levels wouldn’t be any more balanced than they are now, if anything there would be a small decrease in skill balance.

[/quote]

I just think it would be better than the current system because something’s wrong with it right now. I get into countless matches where well-skilled, high-leveled players are all on one team (and not purposely stacking either), and levels under 10 on the other team. These same games are full from the start, so even in the lobby, the game’s are full and yet the balancing system appears to just not work.

I believe the current system has more variables affecting the balance such as players who played in level 5 and below servers, those who play in mostly min level 10 servers, etc. Win/loss record can be skewed by bad teams/good teams and average score per minute can change drastically when someone happens to place a health station in a covered position while playing with decent players.

Don’t get me wrong though, I don’t think either system works very well. I’m just going off of what I’ve noticed in matches. Pretty much any system that’s put in place to balance teams will have its flaws and people will ultimately complain. It just isn’t possible to balance every game perfectly, sadly. :frowning:

(jokingShale) #16

I agree that there’s something wrong with it right now, but that doesn’t mean making an arbitrary change is going to fix it. You need to analyze what’s causing the problem to fix it. What’s causing the problem here in my opinion is how the game allows players to change teams and leave games without any sort of disincentive. It doesn’t matter what you base team balance on, as long as people can just ignore the balancing mechanics it isn’t going to work.

Yes, but despite all those faults, win/loss and score per minute is still a much better indicator of how good someone is than their level. Sheer play time never shows how good someone is, it only shows how persistent they are. Sure, there’s a tendency for higher level players to perform better, but it’s far from a rule you can rely on. Combine that with the fact that levels could be abused by smurfing, and it really is completely useless.

(Teflon Love) #17

The game gets much better once you can play on min level 10 servers.

Before that in my experience it’s almost unplayable due the skill gap between players. Even when you’re a experienced player and teams are pretty balanced it is painful to play on free for all servers because too many people are still learning the map and basic tactics. It’s almost impossible to do anything organized. At best you play a 3 vs 3 with a couple of extras on both sides.

I recommend you grind yourself to level 10. After that only play on free for all servers if there’s no min 10 server or you want to practice a new merc.

As added bonus, stock 3/27 kdr Vasillis typically drop the game before they reach level 10. :wink: