Autobalance - Lack of it is killing this game

2»

Comments

  • KriZ_Rul3Z
    50 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Autobalance is horrible. If you switch me to the other team in the middle of the game, I just quit and join a new server in less than a minute.

    Limiting switching teams is no solution either. You can only switch when your team has the most players, so switching to the winning team doesn't even happen all that much. And the people who do it are often the worst players who can't make a difference in their team, so actually by allowing them to switch to the winning team you're improving balance.

    One more thing: if you're in a bad game, don't torture yourself, just quit. Steamrolling sucks, both on the winning as the losing side. If the game isn't balanced, just quit and you're in a new server in less than a minute. Why bother? To be clear I don't mind losing, if it's a close game. The same goes for winning, I like winning but winning 1000-200 is boring as well and I'll often leave the server as well.
  • Hawkhill_no
    21 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    KriZ_Rul3Z wrote: »
    ...Autobalance is horrible. If you switch me to the other team in the middle of the game, I just quit and join a new server in less than a minute.
    Ok, but I dont understand why you'd waist 10 minutes to find another server, and maybe an even worse team, instead of just get switched. Last in first switched. It doesent have to be 1-1, but like vary with 10-20 % and, not after like half the game is up.

  • bleachee
    784 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    KriZ_Rul3Z wrote: »
    You can only switch when your team has the most players, so switching to the winning team doesn't even happen all that much.

    You can switch to the bigger team. Even when it's a gap of 5-6 players. Sometimes it will stop you with the too imbalanced message but often it doesn't.

    It's the stacking over multiple matches that results in stompings. Players figure out which side is dominant and switch over. This snowballs and you get massacres. It should never be allowed.
  • HuwJarz
    2595 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    bleachee wrote: »
    KriZ_Rul3Z wrote: »
    You can only switch when your team has the most players, so switching to the winning team doesn't even happen all that much.

    You can switch to the bigger team. Even when it's a gap of 5-6 players. Sometimes it will stop you with the too imbalanced message but often it doesn't.

    It's the stacking over multiple matches that results in stompings. Players figure out which side is dominant and switch over. This snowballs and you get massacres. It should never be allowed.

    This is definitely a big issue. You are right. We saw a great case in point.

    Our platoon had a decent squad out a couple of days ago. We won 9 and lost 1 conquest with the loss being a 'spawn in' loss. In one of the first winning games in ballroom blitz our squad went backcapping at D / E. our plan was to hold these two flags to spread the enemy.

    We came up against a a light tank guy with 9000 kills. He was one of those guys that was pretty proficient, but would run back to spawn when under pressure, but he knew what he was doing kept inflicting a substantial number of deaths on our squad we were trying to take him down.

    We managed to keep the squad up, but kept a mental note of his name, as we were determined to try to wreak revenge in subsequent games.

    We were by far the dominant squad in the server, taking the top five spots in most games. In every subsequent game, the tanker guy was in our team. He would immediately teamswitch at the start of every round. To get onto our team. Should not be allowed. Breaks the balance.
  • NLBartmaN
    192 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    This is definitely a big issue. You are right. We saw a great case in point.

    Our platoon had a decent squad out a couple of days ago. We won 9 and lost 1 conquest with the loss being a 'spawn in' loss. In one of the first winning games in ballroom blitz our squad went backcapping at D / E. our plan was to hold these two flags to spread the enemy.

    We came up against a a light tank guy with 9000 kills. He was one of those guys that was pretty proficient, but would run back to spawn when under pressure, but he knew what he was doing kept inflicting a substantial number of deaths on our squad we were trying to take him down.

    We managed to keep the squad up, but kept a mental note of his name, as we were determined to try to wreak revenge in subsequent games.

    We were by far the dominant squad in the server, taking the top five spots in most games. In every subsequent game, the tanker guy was in our team. He would immediately teamswitch at the start of every round. To get onto our team. Should not be allowed. Breaks the balance.

    Besides the fact that the balancing is not done to get a fair match but with other objectives in mind (look for the EA patent movie) you also point out another issue:

    you won 9 games out of 10, and big chance the teams weren't rebalanced after a victory.

    I think most players right now know, that being on the winning or loosing team will keep giving the same result game after game .. because there is no rebalance after a round!

    Even after a steamroll, teams stay the same .. :s
  • HuwJarz
    2595 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    NLBartmaN wrote: »
    HuwJarz wrote: »

    This is definitely a big issue. You are right. We saw a great case in point.

    Our platoon had a decent squad out a couple of days ago. We won 9 and lost 1 conquest with the loss being a 'spawn in' loss. In one of the first winning games in ballroom blitz our squad went backcapping at D / E. our plan was to hold these two flags to spread the enemy.

    We came up against a a light tank guy with 9000 kills. He was one of those guys that was pretty proficient, but would run back to spawn when under pressure, but he knew what he was doing kept inflicting a substantial number of deaths on our squad we were trying to take him down.

    We managed to keep the squad up, but kept a mental note of his name, as we were determined to try to wreak revenge in subsequent games.

    We were by far the dominant squad in the server, taking the top five spots in most games. In every subsequent game, the tanker guy was in our team. He would immediately teamswitch at the start of every round. To get onto our team. Should not be allowed. Breaks the balance.

    Besides the fact that the balancing is not done to get a fair match but with other objectives in mind (look for the EA patent movie) you also point out another issue:

    you won 9 games out of 10, and big chance the teams weren't rebalanced after a victory.

    I think most players right now know, that being on the winning or loosing team will keep giving the same result game after game .. because there is no rebalance after a round!

    Even after a steamroll, teams stay the same .. :s

    I agree. Its a real shame. We did have some pretty competitive games - of the 10, 2 went to less than 100 tickets and maybe 3 where the opposition gets 800-900. But that is not competitive enough.

    As I have stated before, players should not be penalised for playing with friends, but the balance could and should recognise when a platoon is playing together with tags and therefor is likely to be communicating. A weighing could be applied to stiffen up the opposition. I would be happy winning only 50% of games if there were loads of good close ones.

    BTW - saw you in a server with us the other day. Feel free to jump into our squad when we have space. ACES......My PSN is Greeny111 - please feel free to join us for a few rounds.
  • CHAMMOND1992
    372 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    edited January 13
    You won 9 of 10 because of your squad. You broke the balance because of your squad. Light tank guy was either going to switch or leave. A balancer no matter how good, is likely to fail when there's a superior squad amongst an amalgamation of randoms.
  • cso7777
    86 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    Dice have implemented "mid round autobalance" on the newest CTE build.

    I haven't tried it, so i don't know if it works...
  • HuwJarz
    2595 postsMember, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    You won 9 of 10 because of your squad. You broke the balance because of your squad. Light tank guy was either going to switch or leave. A balancer no matter how good, is likely to fail when there's a superior squad amongst an amalgamation of randoms.

    Well, I certainly not going to feel bad about playing the game with mates, they way it is designed, but I also think that the problem you describe does not need to be a problem with good game design. Let me provide an example:

    As far as we know, the balancing works on DICE's skill rating. If they recognised players in platoon and using mic, then they could apply a multiplier against their skill in the balancing. Let's say it was 0.5.

    A player that had skill of 250, pretty poor, but was on a mic would now score 375 before balancing and more likely to get pushed onto a team with worse players.

    I agree tha there is a significant advantage using comms with a good squad. And I am happy, as I know are many platoon members, to face harder, challenging matches. Blame the balancer, not the squad and platoons. All we want o do is play with friends. I want balanced games as much as the lone wolf getting wrecked by a platoon.

  • von_Campenstein
    3546 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE Member
    l_water_l wrote: »
    Increase time to cap a flag by 75% and eliminate squad spawning. Randomize all the squads on both teams at the end of every round.

    That's a little harsh, there should at least be a chance to get to roll with the same squad two matches in a row. Finding a good and functional squad is one of the few things that would make me consider staying on a server for more than one game.
  • disposalist
    5642 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1, CTE, BF1IncursionsAlpha Member
    cso7777 wrote: »
    Dice have implemented "mid round autobalance" on the newest CTE build.

    I haven't tried it, so i don't know if it works...
    I still saw teams start unbalanced and/or become unbalanced. If there was supposed to be mid-round balancing in CTE I didn't see it.
  • TheRealShaggar
    6 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    l_water_l wrote: »
    Increase time to cap a flag by 75% and eliminate squad spawning. Randomize all the squads on both teams at the end of every round.

    better to randomize teams during the match. otherwise everyone (including me) just leaves until we find a better server.
  • TheRealShaggar
    6 postsMember, Battlefield 3, Battlefield 4, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    If more players who joined the server would join the losing side to help out, this wouldn't be so much of a problem. But every one wants to join the winning side because OH MY GOODNESS, they can't have their precious stats blemished with another team loss on their record. I see this every day. The balancing tools are broken obviously, but so is the mentality of a lot of players out there who don't want to make a little sacrifice and join the losing side to help out with the balance.

    The simple solution to this is to make joining a losing game not count against your stats like COD does.

    stats aren't the issue. its not fun to play a losing game.
  • Holmindeboks
    153 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    They could add some "handicap" features, small boosts for an outnumbered team. For example faster flag captures, and faster respawns.

    yes they also do this in mmo with large battles. in guildwars 2 called outnumbered. gives buffs.

    but ppl don’t must leave the game when losing in the beginning. i don’t care winning or losing as long i have fun.
    i remember in previous battlefield games when you work towards a win and at the end you get switched. then you work for your own lost. it’s bad.
    just remove win lost ratio. stats.

    maybe if a team losing because ppl leave. decrease vehicle spawn times. and give some more vehicles. or increase time for spawning vehicles at the bigger team.



  • Captain_DarIing
    1356 postsMember, Battlefield, Battlefield 1 Member
    Sixclicks wrote: »
    If more players who joined the server would join the losing side to help out, this wouldn't be so much of a problem. But every one wants to join the winning side because OH MY GOODNESS, they can't have their precious stats blemished with another team loss on their record. I see this every day. The balancing tools are broken obviously, but so is the mentality of a lot of players out there who don't want to make a little sacrifice and join the losing side to help out with the balance.

    The simple solution to this is to make joining a losing game not count against your stats like COD does.

    stats aren't the issue. its not fun to play a losing game.

    DICE = loserdevs for not doing anything against teambalancer problems.
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!