Team Balance Issues Ruining Games.
So a new game starts and the other team has more players than you. It may be one or two players or as much as five or six. Which in Frontlines can be thirty percent more players on the opposing team. I've even seen a game where one team is two players short, two players join and get put one on each team!
Yes, the teams do eventually become equal in numbers. But only after the game has started and often its to late to turn the tide.
The disparity in team numbers cant be put down to player skill differences. Would it be that hard to have some proper team balancing before the game starts?
Yes, the teams do eventually become equal in numbers. But only after the game has started and often its to late to turn the tide.
The disparity in team numbers cant be put down to player skill differences. Would it be that hard to have some proper team balancing before the game starts?
4
Comments
They fixed that BF4 complaint in BF1.
Now everyone is complaining about team balance.
You cant have it both ways people.
Soissons all capped twice. Amiens all capped twice.
I actually think the masses are getting worse instead of better.
@Private_UMPalot Conquest seems like a FFA, I've noticed a lot of players leaving games the minute it doesn't go their way. This can lead to a "face roll". Plus there are a large number of "selfish" players doing what they want and not whats best for the team. But they payed for it so they can play it the way they want.
Heres the thing, it's not uncommon for me to go into a match and fill up most of a team with a party, this is what people complained about because of the clan base and it got fixed in here.
The game tries to not separate squads for many reasons.
I leave CQ matches super early sometimes myself because I dont feel like having to deal with getting spawn camped and doing poorly which just will make me rage. I do it for my sanity.
Suez is easy. First to capture C normally wins. If I see all the tanks and horses capture the first flag and I see them capping two while we're at the first, I know they will be capturing our next flag very shortly so I leave.
Argonne forest, rare to see the second team to cap C win.
Happened last night while we had a 500 ticket lead.
We were at 900~ and they were at 400~. Granted a ESP hack joined in that caused everyone to get spawn camped instantly, but it I still count it.
You've never played with me before then.
What I like to do is this:
At the beginning of each match, I'll look at the scoreboard, paying attention to the levels of the players on each team. If the other team has more people that are around level 70, 80, 90, 100, etc, I'll switch to that team. Not a complete guarantee that you'll win, since more people join as the match goes on, but it will definitely increase your chances.
This is coming from someone who sees the same issues but I hate to break it to you but they are never going o fix the balancing issue even though they can. And here's why.
Dice/EA dumped a ton of money into marketing behemoths to "turn the tide" in battle. And unfortunately these ridiculous gimmick kill factories only trigger when the game is lopsided.
If the game is balanced behemoths won't trigger, gimmick marketing point is moot, causal gamers who bought the game because of these easy kill factories will go back to their basic arcade shooter, money lost.
I've only seen twice where a behemoth actually "turned the tide" and that was because they were being controlled by the group I was playing with and was coordinated with others on the map.
Highly doubt Dice will ever release the stat with regards to behemoths deployed and matches won after their deployment.
I read this and couldn't get an image of 2 badly plucked turkeys hanging by their necks in a butchers window.
Although a lot better, the quit function is still a bit slow. As a result, many players quit as the next round starts AFTER Team Balarcing has occurred.
The Team Balancer is not perfect but player actions can exacerbate it apparant issues.
Example 32v30 might increase team1 deploy time by 2s. If it is 32v16 team1 could take 1 minute to deploy.
A message like deploy times delayed, for quicker deploy time switch to the other team.
BF is just for fun game (No pro/semi-pro, no esport support). In game no are matchmaking, like for example in CS:GO. Defacto all Battlefield servers - is public servers, like in CS:GO, no are any reason to add perfect team balance, because great percent players of Battlefield is just for fun players, who plays game with beer/cup of tea in one hand, and mouse in another.
So, long story short, as players we can be part of the solution by just not hitting that Deploy button when outnumbered. For myself, I always did that and I am always silently raging when I see 14/15 ready teammates when our team has 10+ guys short....
Off-topic but in the same dumb average players logic: No need to be 32 guys and all vehics at the very first flag you encounter when leaving uncap...
How many people find those constant blowouts fun, though? In every game, there's a pretty large number of people playing to win. No matter what, it's a game, and the point of a game is to win. I think by now most people know that when you're down by over a hundred points, a comeback is almost impossible, so they just quit trying, back out, or switch teams. All of this is problematic. Of course, these things happen in every multiplayer game, but in BF1 it is much more noticeable. I do think team balancing can be further improved, but I also think the ticket system could be looked at. We need to see more hard-fought games going back and forth. That's what makes a game fun.
I respect your opinion but say what you will but the balancer on this game is terrible and the reason players quit so often is because of it. Your viewpoint seems similar to "Which came first? The chicken or the egg?"
BF3 and BF4 end of round balances were way better and I didn't see/hear of people trying to switch teams as often.
As stated this game was pitched on major element factors as Behemoths and as I stated before balanced matches never trigger them because there is no point to. And honesty those matches are the most enjoyable because you don't have to deal with this ridiculous vehicle that roams around that map that's more annoying than effective.
Dice could have avoided this all together and left the more successful and PROVEN balancers in from previous games and the behemoths would trigger less often making them have their initial wow factor. Now when I hear that one has deploying I just know it's a cue from the game letting me know my team has the round in the bag.
Honestly I wish they would just throw a voice cue from CP30 once it's deployed to give me the "calculated odds of failure" for my team losing the game.
Of course you are entitled to your opinion but really?
Well let's take a logical look at this. If the game is balanced and close a Behemoth would upset and over power one side in an unjust manner.
When a game is balanced and close there is no need for a Behemoth. Only way to make those over hyped marketed kill factories spawn is to have unbalanced servers.
You can not have behemoths and balanced teams.
It's one or the other. Not both.