What to do about player imbalances

[RedBeard]

FSO is a player run event and this month’s Battle of Britain has been particularly challenging. I’ve heard a number of complaints about side balance issues. If we don’t like something, let’s talk about what to do about it.

I have stats on players for frame 1 & 2 that I will post, but I’m going to wait until the frame 3 logs are out to include them as well. It was clear to me that side balance was an issue.

Personally, I think BoB doesn’t work so well with small numbers. In fact, I question whether or not any assault style event will work well with small numbers as small changes in numbers make for large percentage difference shifts.

BoB also has a challenge with the technology difference between plane sets. It may be historically accurate and the Allied pilots may have had to deal with such a difference, but multiplayer just exacerbates the frustration by making you relive it over and over again.  The carbureted engines and the 303 gun set makes a terrible combo.

We need to decide whether or not to do another BoB event in the future and if so, what changes do we want to make.  Personally, I’d have an easier time playing Allies if it was a 1 hour single life event. If we keep multilife and run BoB again, then I would say that the player balance needs to favor the Allies to help make up for the technology differences.

I’ll post player stats tomorrow.

[Spikes]

In fact, I question whether or not any assault style event will work well with small numbers as small changes in numbers make for large percentage difference shifts.

Conversely, IMO, assault style setups are starting to be the only thing that works well due to the small numbers. Bunching up our 30v30 into one area seems a lot better than 15v15 and 15v15 (if it even works out that well). But I agree, the smaller the numbers, the larger that percentage split becomes important.

We have weeded out particular planes and/or matchups over the years and if BoB is a consensus 'no' then so be it - though I feel that sets a bad precedent because Ju 88s vs. Typhoons and P-47s isn't fun either but we run those events too.

 

[fudgums]

Not fun when the rabbit has the gun..

[AKKuya]

Start of the new school year, family plans, work issues, health issues (older crowd of players), and other issues that happen at last minute.  Each player still believes turnout will be fine without them.  It's sad when too many miss out on the same night.

Small amount of material I posted in Hotard's rant post.  It is a simple summary of side balance issues.  There is no way to plan for these contingencies.

FSO relies on squad participation, and each squad relies on member participation.

The other factor is plane set matchup and objectives.  That belongs to the FSO designer.  That sometimes factor into the player participation especially when they believe they are on the short end of the stick.  The squads participating now in FSO have weathered these issues and maintained player participation really well.  There are a few players that occasionally have personal issues and miss out hurting their squad and side. 

When the new FSO is announced in the forum, that is when discussion should be done for any issues before sides are decided.  Silence breed trouble.  Squads need to voice their concerns here as soon as they see them.

One solution is too end FSO due to low turnout.  No matter what is tried.  It never gets better.  Too many complainers being vocal in the forum.

Another solution is to only do 1944/5 setup utilizing what players fly in the MA.  Early war and mid war setups don't appeal to the players. 

The next solution is to redesign the FSO.  Move away from squad combat to squad challenge.  Squads compete against each other in achieving goals.

No matter what you do in the game, you still have RL stated in the first paragraph highlighted in blue.  I would love to see suggestions on combating that.

Bext thing is to keep flying and weather the hiccups as they manifest.

 

[hazmatt]

Too bad to hear about the FSO challenges. It was the one event that kept many players hanging around even after they stopped playing in the MA. Back in the day FSO was my favorite event. I hope things turn around.

[RedBeard]

Conversely, IMO, assault style setups are starting to be the only thing that works well due to the small numbers. Bunching up our 30v30 into one area seems a lot better than 15v15 and 15v15 (if it even works out that well). But I agree, the smaller the numbers, the larger that percentage split becomes important.

That's fair.  So, to make sure everyone is on the same page here, we need a moment to discuss intentional side imbalances.  As I understand it, assault style events are intentionally unbalanced to favor the attacking side.  The idea being that some portion of the attacking side will be in bombers while the remaining portion in fighters will be roughly balanced with the defending side, or something like that.

I'm not sure if the events call for specific percentages or if it all depends on total numbers less minimum required bomber pilots.  With numbers being small, I would think the latter.

There are six previous BoB events I have data for.  I'll be looking at side balancing for the old single life events vs. the later multi-life events.

[Devil 505]

That's fair.  So, to make sure everyone is on the same page here, we need a moment to discuss intentional side imbalances.  As I understand it, assault style events are intentionally unbalanced to favor the attacking side.  The idea being that some portion of the attacking side will be in bombers while the remaining portion in fighters will be roughly balanced with the defending side, or something like that.

I'm not sure if the events call for specific percentages or if it all depends on total numbers less minimum required bomber pilots.  With numbers being small, I would think the latter.

There are six previous BoB events I have data for.  I'll be looking at side balancing for the old single life events vs. the later multi-life events.

The intended balance for my Assault style FSO's, this one included, is that the defenders have more total fighters than the attackers, but fewer player overall. I was aiming to have 5-10 extra Axis players this month. Frames 1 and 2 were both in that range.

[RedBeard]

Start of the new school year, family plans, work issues, health issues (older crowd of players), and other issues that happen at last minute.  Each player still believes turnout will be fine without them.  It's sad when too many miss out on the same night.

This is the unintentional side imbalances.  We don't know the reasons why people aren't showing up, we just know the results of people not showing up.

Here's a look at active pilots (i.e. those currently flying) over time for the 3 frames in August.



Here's a look at the ratio of Axis to Allied pilots over the same time period.



We can see that in frame 1, the Allies start with a roughly 1.2:1 disadvantage, which may be in line with the designer's desire to balance fighters.  We see that the light colored frame 1 lines are closest.  Combat is joined and the Allies lose most of their planes.  At T+45, we see the Allies return in their previous numbers, then both sides dwindle off in numbers as the event progresses.

For frame 2, the Allies start with a slightly worse 1.3:1 disadvantage.  Again, combat is joined and the Allies lose most of the planes.  At T+45, we can see that some people have chosen to log rather than return.  We don't know why, but it's obvious they are not doing what they did in frame 1. 

For frame 3, the Allies start with a bad 2:1 disadvantage and as combat is joined, it quickly grows to a 9:1 disadvantage.  Again, more people log rather than try a second life and of those that try a second life, the odds go quickly to 3:1 disadvantage and we lose more people who decide to log rather than return.

While we don't know for sure why people are choosing to log, it is clear (to me anyway) that Allied pilot behavior in frames 2 & 3 deviates from frame 1 and that choosing either not to participate at all or to fly only 1 or 2 sorties has a pretty drastic impact to those who fly the whole event.  It's also clear to me that once the odds go beyond 3:1, it's pretty futile to launch and try to get anything reasonable done.

So, while there is unintentional imbalances with various sides meeting or slightly exceeding max commitments or not making minimum commitments, the more serious issue seems to be that the Allies were totally overwhelmed in each of the three frames.

[fudgums]

We can draw graphs, blame CMs, whatever you want. At the end of the day it was an a** kicking and allies tapped out.

Better pray for tempests in September or it’s another sweep.

Noe Mossies
Manned ack
Lame temps
Unescorted buffs
Axis in 3

[RedBeard]

I took a look at the previous six BoB events to compare with August:

Frame	% Allies	% Axis	Allied Survival Rate	Allied/Axis Fighter Loss Rate	% Heavy	Axis Heavy AC Success Rate	Axis Aircraft
2012-05 F1	46%	54%	50%	equal	58%	40%	Ju 88 Ju 87 Bf 110
2012-05 F2	48%	52%	54%	1x+		28%
2012-05 F3	50%	50%	62%	equal		26%
2013-08 F1	39%	61%	43%	2x	58%	41%	He 111 Ju 88 Ju 87 Bf 110
2013-08 F2	41%	59%	54%	3x		46%
2013-08 F3	37%	63%	34%	2x+		39%
2014-08 F1	45%	55%	42%	2.5x	47%	48%
2014-08 F2	41%	59%	40%	1.5x		56%
2014-08 F3	43%	57%	50%	2x		39%
2015-09 F1	46%	54%	60%	2x	57%	44%	He 111 Ju 87 Bf 110
2015-09 F2	45%	55%	53%	2x		30%
2015-09 F3	40%	60%	44%	2x		52%
2017-08 F1	49%	51%	57%	1.5x	49%	33%
2017-08 F2	49%	51%	59%	1x+		39%
2017-08 F3	54%	46%	57%	1.5x		1%
2019-09 F1	49%	51%	34%	1.5X	46%	17%
2019-09 F2	48%	52%	51%	equal		16%
2025-08 F1	48%	52%	12%	2.5x	62%	23%
2025-08 F2	42%	57%	22%	2.5x		38%
2025-08 F3	35%	65%	16%	4x		48%

It feels like something significant has changed.  Historically, Allies lose fighters at about 2:1 unless they have numbers advantage, then it evens out or goes 1.5:1, or 2.5:1 if Allied numbers are down.  A 4X loss rate seems like a pretty extreme outlier.  Looking at general survivability, Allies typically run 34% to 62% surviving, while this past month it ran 12%-22%.  Most everything else seems to be in a normal kind of range.

So, why would the Allies be losing planes at a higher rate compared to before?  Have changes been made to weaken the Spit I or Hurri I?  Have the Bf 109E-4 or Bf 110C had improvements?  I did hear comments from people wondering if the 303s had been nerfed.

[RedBeard]

I suppose one possibility is we have reached a tipping point in participation.  With Allies at 25 people to start, losing 2 planes is almost a 10% loss in air power.  Losses will compound quickly with these kinds of numbers.