I was on a server last night where fully 2/3 of one team were clan members.
I get the way you can clan stack, it isn't hard. But these aren't rented clan servers, this **** should not happen.
They stomped the side I was on by a ludicrous margin.
This game needs some form of balance.
I'm seeing multiple clans working together to produce imbalanced games, and it's a safe bet that they are on each other's friends lists and using the same VOIP channel too because they are mixing with each other in the same squads. IMO this amounts to stat padding. If DICE would wake up and have the server scramble squads between rounds then at least there wouldn't be a string of one-sided rounds. With no rented servers and thus no admins there isn't anyone to balance teams, so scrambling squads between teams seems to be the only way around this situation.
Yup. On rented team servers some nights they would have team practice nights and being fodder was the price of admission.. totally ok with that. But on public servers DICE runs with absolutely no active moderation it's completely unacceptable. I'll just leave with a reoccurring comment... the EA forums have active moderation.. their game servers do not.. priorities.
Teams should just start mass leaving clan stacks let them play in empty lobbies.
People ARE doing that. The problem is that matchmaking keeps filling those spots, so servers are perpetually running lopsided matches.
The suck part is it takes forever to leave one match and get into another. And there is a good chance the next server you hop to is just as lopsided.
Sure would be nice if you could see the population of the server.. players and current score of the match in the server browser. But nope... dice decided that information was not useful and scuttled it... genius.
Lost so many matches in a row for the past few days that I did play, with very few victories, because of this. It's another reason I refuse to play this game for long periods of time.
Geez you can see the problem right there, one team is four people short, two have not spawned at all and another six have only been in the round for the last couple of minutes. Naturally it is imbalanced. This has little to do with matchmaking or teambalance, only players quitting the round for whatever reason and therefore creating a lopsided match. Plus it is also GO and day three I assume, so we do not know how the two days before went.
Matter of fact you can see that both teams have players that did not perform well yet nevertheless stuck around. How is a team supposed to win that is constantly short of players? If you want a balanced round, do not leave the server when you are frustrated as it will create an even more lopsided experience for the rest.
I think in certain modes (like rush, and certain "days" on Grand Operations) some people ONLY want to defend.. because it is a little like shooting fish in a barrel. If you know they have to arm objective A, then simply sit back and wait for 'fools to rush in' to try to arm A.
It is psychology 101.... one person can focus on one thing: shooting people that get anywhere near the 3 routes leading to objective A, and the other person has to
1. Stay alive
2. Be sneaky (take the road less travelled)
3. avoid the 3 people camping on the objective
4. lay prone and wait and pray they circle completes before being killed... then they simply disarm it while you are respawning 300 meters away.
Lather-rinse-repeat.
So in reality.. some people will leave when it is "their turn" to attack.. because attackers have to focus on numerous things and defending is simple. (camp and kill people coming to this precise spot on the map)
Teams should just start mass leaving clan stacks let them play in empty lobbies.
Yeah after my team is whooped pretty good and I see the best squad is all clan-mates, I leave.
It is obvious that communication and reviving mates ALWAYS wins over playing with randoms that are doing 32 separate (selfish) things (like shooting out of their own spawn for K/D, and not caring that the enemy has all the flags---for conquest at least)
Balance has been atrocious in bf1, and now in bf5, because of the matchmaking system. In bf1, you can usually just take a look at the scoreboard before the round started to see which team was pre-selected to win that round.
Next time you join a server that is about to start a new round, take a look and see if the largest team gets new players added to them before the smaller team gets more players added. Very often, that indicates which team is supposed to win that round.
Nobody was clan stacked in my screenshot, RSP will help but DICE needs to address the numbers. There is no reason why quick joining a conquest match would put me on the team already over balanced before the match even starts. nothing to do with pub stacking
DICE: We take away team switching
Me: Really? Hopefully this means you took some measures for balancing the teams so I will not be on a losing team for 6 rounds...
DICE: LOL no you silly man, we will not even re-use the autobalancer from BF1
Me: (o__o)
Lol last night i was on a team facing 7 players from on clan, 4 from a second, and 4 from a third. How the h*ll dice coded that type of balancing boggles my mind. When half the opposing team is 3 clans. Curb stomp server ffs
Matches are indeed often one-sided. I've only been in only a fraction of matches that resulted in close outcomes. I have seen matches where though there were 50s on both sides, I come to find that one team will have a great deal more. Though I feel its a 50% that those levels either resulted from playing a lot versus people who are challenging players. Just today I've played the past 3 matches that were completely one-sided, and I often find myself piggy-backing the rest of the team. In my experience when I am on the winning team I find that everyone is playing the objective, using their classes, and so on, where as in games where I'm on the losing team, I hardly see any of that. The issue is not a matter of being on a losing team, the issue is being on a losing team that is completely one-sided game after game. I don't mind sitting through a game and I lose, because often its a learning experience on the mechanics of this game, however I do mind sitting through a frustrating experience game after game, then on top of that, I never play normal mode, and with hardcore servers not yet being implemented, I find myself not being able to play the game for long periods of time and often will switch to another game sometimes even bf4 to kinda give me some sort of redemption from bf5. It's definitely a love/hate relationship with this game, with so many aspects being truly amazing, but sprinkled with these bugs and all of these other things that go on in the game, it's really hard to play this game at times, and I've been playing Battlefield since BF2 PC days.
The points for the losing team are meaningless as it is day three of the operations and most of the losing team has clearly just recently entered the game. The main reason for the ticket difference is the difference in actual active players in this particular round.
did not realize, thought it was conquest, my comment applies to conquest as it is the only mode I play on a regular basis
Geez you can see the problem right there, one team is four people short, two have not spawned at all and another six have only been in the round for the last couple of minutes. Naturally it is imbalanced. This has little to do with matchmaking or teambalance, only players quitting the round for whatever reason and therefore creating a lopsided match. Plus it is also GO and day three I assume, so we do not know how the two days before went.
Matter of fact you can see that both teams have players that did not perform well yet nevertheless stuck around. How is a team supposed to win that is constantly short of players? If you want a balanced round, do not leave the server when you are frustrated as it will create an even more lopsided experience for the rest.
A team short by 5 people makes no difference when the team is pure trash and worthless.
When I played the beta, almost every game seemed to end like 0-50 or less. Recently Ive noticed that every game I play seems to end 0-300 or more. Its really weird.
I dont mind losing games. Its fine imo. But losing games by a huge amount just isnt fun, mostly because it means that the enemy team has probably got you in a situation where you cant really play the game. On some maps like Narvik and Fjell, they are quite linear and its fairly easy to force one team into a situation they cant really recover from. Earlier I had two games where this happened. One was when my team took almost every objective other than A iirc, and completely locked down the map. Because of the linear paths, the enemy team couldnt flank or do anything to stop us winning at all. We later took A and kept them locked into their spawn and they physically had no way of stopping us from doing it. Our team could spawn into the closest objectives and there was no need to defend the others because they couldnt actually reach them. The second time, also on Fjell, it was the reverse and my team took C and D and basically locked down the enemy team at E. They couldn't go anywhere. As long as our team were in the paths between other objectives and spawned on C and D, they couldnt stop us from winning the game at all. And it kinda sucks I think making maps more open and giving enemies flanking opportunities might be one way to make games and closer. But i think there are other improvements that could be made in other ways also
Comments
Yup. On rented team servers some nights they would have team practice nights and being fodder was the price of admission.. totally ok with that. But on public servers DICE runs with absolutely no active moderation it's completely unacceptable. I'll just leave with a reoccurring comment... the EA forums have active moderation.. their game servers do not.. priorities.
People ARE doing that. The problem is that matchmaking keeps filling those spots, so servers are perpetually running lopsided matches.
The suck part is it takes forever to leave one match and get into another. And there is a good chance the next server you hop to is just as lopsided.
Sure would be nice if you could see the population of the server.. players and current score of the match in the server browser. But nope... dice decided that information was not useful and scuttled it... genius.
This. Clan stacks ruin servers. Just like in other BF games. Surprised DICE didnt come up with something to solve this.
This was a day or so ago, before the match even started. Its obvious the issue is all on DICE
I think in certain modes (like rush, and certain "days" on Grand Operations) some people ONLY want to defend.. because it is a little like shooting fish in a barrel. If you know they have to arm objective A, then simply sit back and wait for 'fools to rush in' to try to arm A.
It is psychology 101.... one person can focus on one thing: shooting people that get anywhere near the 3 routes leading to objective A, and the other person has to
1. Stay alive
2. Be sneaky (take the road less travelled)
3. avoid the 3 people camping on the objective
4. lay prone and wait and pray they circle completes before being killed... then they simply disarm it while you are respawning 300 meters away.
Lather-rinse-repeat.
So in reality.. some people will leave when it is "their turn" to attack.. because attackers have to focus on numerous things and defending is simple. (camp and kill people coming to this precise spot on the map)
Yeah after my team is whooped pretty good and I see the best squad is all clan-mates, I leave.
It is obvious that communication and reviving mates ALWAYS wins over playing with randoms that are doing 32 separate (selfish) things (like shooting out of their own spawn for K/D, and not caring that the enemy has all the flags---for conquest at least)
And that's why the game needs rented servers so clan kids can play with themselves on their own servers and let normal people play on offcial ones.
Next time you join a server that is about to start a new round, take a look and see if the largest team gets new players added to them before the smaller team gets more players added. Very often, that indicates which team is supposed to win that round.
Same thing in bf5.
Me: Really? Hopefully this means you took some measures for balancing the teams so I will not be on a losing team for 6 rounds...
DICE: LOL no you silly man, we will not even re-use the autobalancer from BF1
Me: (o__o)
did not realize, thought it was conquest, my comment applies to conquest as it is the only mode I play on a regular basis
A team short by 5 people makes no difference when the team is pure trash and worthless.
I dont mind losing games. Its fine imo. But losing games by a huge amount just isnt fun, mostly because it means that the enemy team has probably got you in a situation where you cant really play the game. On some maps like Narvik and Fjell, they are quite linear and its fairly easy to force one team into a situation they cant really recover from. Earlier I had two games where this happened. One was when my team took almost every objective other than A iirc, and completely locked down the map. Because of the linear paths, the enemy team couldnt flank or do anything to stop us winning at all. We later took A and kept them locked into their spawn and they physically had no way of stopping us from doing it. Our team could spawn into the closest objectives and there was no need to defend the others because they couldnt actually reach them. The second time, also on Fjell, it was the reverse and my team took C and D and basically locked down the enemy team at E. They couldn't go anywhere. As long as our team were in the paths between other objectives and spawned on C and D, they couldnt stop us from winning the game at all. And it kinda sucks