DICE gamebalance is a joke and a disgrace

Hawkhill_no
23 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
DICE gamebalance is a Joke, a disgrace, and a mockery of players and the money we have paid you. 32 vs 14 means game over before we even start. You cant even appeal to the other team to switch for balance. Shame on you people at DICE for ruining the game for all.

Comments

  • disposalist
    8067 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I'm assuming this is BF5 AGAIN because you can get the other team to switch in BF1 (they won't, but it's possible).

    Seriously, I know BF5 has LOTS of issues, but the overflow into BF1 forums is getting silly.
  • Titan_Awaken
    218 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I'm assuming this is BF5 AGAIN because you can get the other team to switch in BF1 (they won't, but it's possible).

    Seriously, I know BF5 has LOTS of issues, but the overflow into BF1 forums is getting silly.

    5 or not, balancing, assuming it even exists, is still an issue in BF1.

    At least 1 in every 4 matches (and this is being generous) is going to be a massive pubstomp with one team just base camping the other. Behemoth is dead in under 2 minutes and the match lasts 20 minutes if you're lucky (normal match is around 30-35 mins for 64p Conquest).

    Starting round balance is "a joke", as OP elegantly put it, if there isn't a full game of 64 players beforehand (which is 99.95% of time since many people leave after the round ends).

    Take a theoretical match with 50 players in the server. You would expect the balancer to put 25 and 25 on each side but nope, team A has 23 players, team B has 25 players and the remaining 2 players are still loading. The remaining 2 have finally loaded in and are placed in the most logical place of course: Team B! And now it's a 23 v 27 because reasons. Then as the match progresses, more people join until it's finally 32 v 32 but the damage has already been done. Then the mid round balancer comes does jack all except cherrypick a few good players from their squads/platoons onto the losing side that's 300 tickets behind and expect them to magically carry the rest of the team to victory.

    Wonder what they're going to do about it with V, if anything?
  • disposalist
    8067 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I'm assuming this is BF5 AGAIN because you can get the other team to switch in BF1 (they won't, but it's possible).

    Seriously, I know BF5 has LOTS of issues, but the overflow into BF1 forums is getting silly.

    5 or not, balancing, assuming it even exists, is still an issue in BF1.

    At least 1 in every 4 matches (and this is being generous) is going to be a massive pubstomp with one team just base camping the other. Behemoth is dead in under 2 minutes and the match lasts 20 minutes if you're lucky (normal match is around 30-35 mins for 64p Conquest).

    Starting round balance is "a joke", as OP elegantly put it, if there isn't a full game of 64 players beforehand (which is 99.95% of time since many people leave after the round ends).

    Take a theoretical match with 50 players in the server. You would expect the balancer to put 25 and 25 on each side but nope, team A has 23 players, team B has 25 players and the remaining 2 players are still loading. The remaining 2 have finally loaded in and are placed in the most logical place of course: Team B! And now it's a 23 v 27 because reasons. Then as the match progresses, more people join until it's finally 32 v 32 but the damage has already been done. Then the mid round balancer comes does jack all except cherrypick a few good players from their squads/platoons onto the losing side that's 300 tickets behind and expect them to magically carry the rest of the team to victory.

    Wonder what they're going to do about it with V, if anything?
    Balance is, indeed, an issue in BF1 too. I have regularly complained about it. I was constantly amazed that DICE gave minuscule regard to probably the biggest problem in the game.

    BF5 makes one important change and screws it up. I called again and again for team switching *to the winning/bigger side* to be removed. So DICE remove it completely, stopping people from even moving to the smaller/losing side. Another good idea executed badly.
  • Titan_Awaken
    218 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    I'm assuming this is BF5 AGAIN because you can get the other team to switch in BF1 (they won't, but it's possible).

    Seriously, I know BF5 has LOTS of issues, but the overflow into BF1 forums is getting silly.

    5 or not, balancing, assuming it even exists, is still an issue in BF1.

    At least 1 in every 4 matches (and this is being generous) is going to be a massive pubstomp with one team just base camping the other. Behemoth is dead in under 2 minutes and the match lasts 20 minutes if you're lucky (normal match is around 30-35 mins for 64p Conquest).

    Starting round balance is "a joke", as OP elegantly put it, if there isn't a full game of 64 players beforehand (which is 99.95% of time since many people leave after the round ends).

    Take a theoretical match with 50 players in the server. You would expect the balancer to put 25 and 25 on each side but nope, team A has 23 players, team B has 25 players and the remaining 2 players are still loading. The remaining 2 have finally loaded in and are placed in the most logical place of course: Team B! And now it's a 23 v 27 because reasons. Then as the match progresses, more people join until it's finally 32 v 32 but the damage has already been done. Then the mid round balancer comes does jack all except cherrypick a few good players from their squads/platoons onto the losing side that's 300 tickets behind and expect them to magically carry the rest of the team to victory.

    Wonder what they're going to do about it with V, if anything?
    Balance is, indeed, an issue in BF1 too. I have regularly complained about it. I was constantly amazed that DICE gave minuscule regard to probably the biggest problem in the game.

    BF5 makes one important change and screws it up. I called again and again for team switching *to the winning/bigger side* to be removed. So DICE remove it completely, stopping people from even moving to the smaller/losing side. Another good idea executed badly.

    Seems like there's just no middle ground for DICE, it's all or nothing.
  • kAn3_R4nd4g10
    5 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Balance or not balance, i think it's a war game and in war it's quite normal to fight unbalanced battles. If you don't like how the match is going you could join another server.
  • Titan_Awaken
    218 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    iFritz_Lee wrote: »
    Balance or not balance, i think it's a war game and in war it's quite normal to fight unbalanced battles. If you don't like how the match is going you could join another server.

    From a realism standpoint, yeah, every battle is going to be unbalanced. Hence the popular saying: "There is no such thing as a fair fight".

    From a gameplay standpoint, an unbalanced battle is not enjoyable from ANY perspective, the attacking side or the defending side. When matches last barely 18 minutes, when behemoths go down less than 3 minutes of spawning, when a team can't even step foot outside their base and when there's no sense of competition between the teams, all the fun and enjoyment is gone. The winning team isn't given a challenge, a chance to prove their skill and the losing team is too busy getting their rears kicked.

    Same thing with Suppression (beyond visual suppression). From a realistic standpoint, it is normal for even the most elite and seasoned of soldiers to flinch and recoil while getting shot at. It's human instinct. Ever had that friend that made you blink by pretending to 'punch' you in the face and draw back at the last moment? Same thing there.

    From a gameplay standpoint, Suppression is the worst game mechanic ever. It rewards players who miss their shots, making a successful retaliation almost impossible outside of very close quarters. Like why should I suffer because YOU (not referring to anyone specifically) can't aim? It doesn't make sense.

    So yeah, your argument doesn't hold up in a game.
  • kAn3_R4nd4g10
    5 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Idk bro, my highest spree was done in a unbalanced Battle, we were like their half in numbers.
  • duellingcarl
    139 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    Every time it says the teams are unbalanced starting auto balancer my friend and I just laugh.
  • SteveSt1fler
    44 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    EVERY game i try to play in BF1 on pc is a disgrace. I havent joined a game where the team im on scores more than 250
  • disposalist
    8067 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha, Battlefield V Member
    EVERY game i try to play in BF1 on pc is a disgrace. I havent joined a game where the team im on scores more than 250
    You're not playing conquest then?
  • SteveSt1fler
    44 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, Battlefield V Member
    It was conquest.
    EVERY game i try to play in BF1 on pc is a disgrace. I havent joined a game where the team im on scores more than 250
    You're not playing conquest then?

    It was conquest. Every single game. Other team stacked every round and had our teams spawn trapped. 1000-250 isnt fun
  • BaroudeurUltime
    11 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    From a gameplay standpoint, an unbalanced battle is not enjoyable from ANY perspective, the attacking side or the defending side. When matches last barely 18 minutes, when behemoths go down less than 3 minutes of spawning, when a team can't even step foot outside their base and when there's no sense of competition between the teams, all the fun and enjoyment is gone. The winning team isn't given a challenge, a chance to prove their skill and the losing team is too busy getting their rears kicked.

    I played an operation on Sinai. We had to fight 3 attacks on the same two flags, and my side couldn't co-ordinate to take the ridges around while the opposition constantly took them back and just pinged everyone from up high. It was like an hour or more on the same two flags. Not a fun gaming experience at all for me. If I wasn't trying to rank so bad and had so much time invested I woulda quit and lost all my points.
  • CrashCA
    822 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, Battlefield V Member
    Wait, there's a balancer !!
  • dead_gretzel
    42 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield Hardline, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    edited February 12
    Im not seeing this sort of crazy unbalance on xbone. Its rare for a match to be extremely onesided and I just leave those anyway.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!