Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => Wishlist => Topic started by: gozulio on January 28, 2023, 03:28:30 AM
-
This game needs to force team balance. The fact that it doesn't is pretty baffling. Every other PvP game ever does it. Have the game periodically check if the teams are balanced and if they aren't force players onto another team. Also lock players out of joining already stacked teams if the game doesn't do that already.
I know the game algorithmically decides what planes a side can use based on player count per team, and this is supposed to address balance. However that's not going to help if the difference in player numbers between teams differs by a significant percentage. If you have 50% of players on a single team, you'll have players fighting out numbered by 2:1. Engagements like that are untenable regardless of what aircraft you have access to. As player counts continue to decline these values will only continue to get more and more extreme.
-
I've said many times before Battlefield has an excellent system.
It will also ask for volunteers to help balance the numbers. You can switch with a dot command.
It warns that if not enough volunteers stand up, then auto-balancing will engage.
On a death, it will switch you if needed and thank you for "volunteering".
If I am part of a Party (like a squad) and I join a server but get auto-balanced to to wrong side, eventually on a death, it will check and auto-swap me over to the side the rest of my party is on as soon as a slot is available.
Not perfect, but perhaps better than ENY.
But this would never happen.
-
This, like many others, has been suggested before. But this would prevent squad members from flying together, which would be very counterproductive. Even if I am not on a squad, I may be flying missions with a group of people, and suddenly I am bounced from the group, and forced to fly on the other team. You would be arbitrarily preventing some people from flying flying the missions they are paying to fly.
This is why we have ENY. I hate ENY, but it serves a purpose. This is why players can choose to be on an auto-switch list. If a player chooses, that player can be automatically switched to the lower number team, and is rewarded with perk points for doing so. But to force people to switch means for some people they can't play the game they are paying for.
-
Even if I am not on a squad, I may be flying missions with a group of people, and suddenly I am bounced from the group, and forced to fly on the other team. You would be arbitrarily preventing some people from flying flying the missions they are paying to fly.
Just to make sure I was clear, Battlefield doesn't just switch you in the middle of play. That would be chaos. When you die, it check before taking you to the map room.
On the other hand, ENY may keep me from flying the planes I pay to fly. And I may not be able to switch over because of switch time limit. And I might be being punished by ENY by a large squad of players who are not even on the server any more.
No system is perfect. Each has pros and cons. The Battlefield system has worked great for decades. It never annoyed me too much. It always seemed like a reasonable compromise.
But of course this will never happen.
-
Forcing players into anything never works. In the OPs case all it would do would be to see the player log off as soon as they were switched to another team.
ENY works but needs to be adjusted. First, go through and adjust the ENY on the planes/vehicles. Some of them are so far out of wack that its laughable. Second, adjust how ENY is decided. Right now it is done by the percentage of players in game on each team. Once it hits a certain threshold the team with the largest population gets hit with ENY. Unfortunately that team could also be the the team getting ganged on both fronts, so it is very easy for a situation to come up where 1 team has ENY restrictions and yet is out number 2 vs 1 of worst. The ENY system should take into account the percentage of players from each team engaged with the other teams.
I also think the threshold for when the ENY system kisks in should be raised a bit so the early/off hour players dont have to deal with such big fluctuations as the game is spending more and more time in that state these days.
-
Forcing players into anything never works. In the OPs case all it would do would be to see the player log off as soon as they were switched to another team.
As opposed to people logging off because they can't fly the planes they want and can't switch because of switch time limit. Possibly being punished for players who are not even logged in anymore.
-
Players don't seem to want balanced sides.
This morning it was Bish 20, Knit 10, Rook 12. Bish had over 27% of Knit bases, Rooks had 0% of Knit bases. Bish were attacking the Rooks. Who were the Knits attacking? Also, Rooks. No activity at all on the Bish/Knit front. This is not unique to the Knits, all sides do it. Players often have the option to create better balance, but don't always do so.
"The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars..." :D
https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,404990.msg5387747.html#new
-
This morning it was Bish 20, Knit 10, Rook 12. Bish had over 27% of Knit bases, Rooks had 0% of Knit bases.
That's the magical power of 3-sides.
As opposed to two sides with side balancing, so no side is blocked from accessing the one good fight that might be on the map when that is over on the front between the other two teams which is too far for you to feasibly reach.
But none of that would ever happen. Nor the improvements that Fugi suggested. Prove me wrong.
-
This, like many others, has been suggested before. But this would prevent squad members from flying together, which would be very counterproductive. Even if I am not on a squad, I may be flying missions with a group of people, and suddenly I am bounced from the group, and forced to fly on the other team. You would be arbitrarily preventing some people from flying flying the missions they are paying to fly.
Modern auto balance systems will move a player when they die and not while they're in the middle of playing. I'll also say that while it does suck to be balanced away from your friends, I don't see games dropping player count over it. This could also be mitigated by considering what squad players are in when a balance check occurs and only move players in that squad if the whole squad can be moved. It's also been pointed out already that you can make it ask for volunteers to change teams in order to try and avoid force balancing. Even that alone would probably do a lot to help team balance. I'd be more concerned about how sorties can last upwards of an hour.
As for ENY, it's appears to me that ENY was meant to balance teams of players that number in the multiple hundreds, Not a server with less than 60 or so players on it. During around 8PM EST I'd actually say the system works ok. However I don't think it's a solution on it's own and it needs something like forced team outbalance to keep it in check.
-
AH has become a game of two chess pieces ganging one. Human nature... people play fight games, but they only want to join fights they can likely win. No idea how automatic side balancing will help. If 90 are playing, it will still become basically 60 vs 30.
-
No idea how automatic side balancing will help.
What about two-sides with auto-balancing?
-
So when we run a scenario or FSO, do the admins just let one side get ridiculously out numbered just because everyone wants to fly on one side? Or do we say they will be accommodated if possible but might have to play for the other side to keep the event fun and fair?
-
Needs 2 countries.
SunDown
-
Several problems & issues have been mentioned.
One that I didn't see addressed is the nature of the game. Unlike the in other games which use auto balancing features for all players, there is a war going on in the arena. And this war isn't over in a few minutes or an hour, it can take many days until the map is won. One big motivation for many players is to win this war. Or to prevent the other side winning it while they are on. You would take that away if everybody could just be switched to another team (or auto assigned at log in). Imagine fighting in a pitched battle for an airbase, and suddenly you're on the other side before you can win it. OR you fought for the team in the war, and shortly before it's finally won, you are suddenly on the other side.
Also, there is still a longer term strategic element to missions in AH, most notably the strats. I personally would feel very uncomfortable having successfully smashed some key installations in a daring 2 hour sortie and suddenly find myself on the side I bombed. There would be no point for me in such missions, which I enjoy quite a bit anymore, if I could not reap the 'rewards' of it afterwards.
I do switch teams, but it's always on a per map decision: When I first time log on a new map, I decide if I stay on this side, or if it's about time for a switch. But whatever my decision, I stay on that time for the whole remainder of this map.
Yes, some players already don't care about the war or the teams at all, but they are not in the majority. Note how few players are green on the roster despite the big perk incentive?
Ripping squads & teams apart like this would create quite an outrage, much more than the ENY complaints could ever do.
-
Several problems & issues have been mentioned.
One that I didn't see addressed is the nature of the game.
Those are fair points.
It seems not enough players are willing to voluntarily switch. Which is why it gets so imbalanced. If auto-balance is not acceptable, then that is an argument for ENY.
Sorry, not sure of the current algorithm.
Can the ENY not take away planes from the high side, but merely unlock free perks to the underdog while imbalanced? A gaggle of ME-262 can put up a fun defense.
If not already, would that be better?
-
Ripping squads & teams apart like this would create quite an outrage, much more than the ENY complaints could ever do.
Agreed. And hey, I'm one of the people who doesn't care about the war and has selected auto-switch.
Even thought the squads are fewer and are composed of fewer people, squads have always been one of the big attractions of Airwarrior-type games. They're the principal reason we have ENY. Get rid of squads, and the game will disintegrate.
- oldman
-
Several problems & issues have been mentioned.
One that I didn't see addressed is the nature of the game. Unlike the in other games which use auto balancing features for all players, there is a war going on in the arena. And this war isn't over in a few minutes or an hour, it can take many days until the map is won. One big motivation for many players is to win this war. Or to prevent the other side winning it while they are on. You would take that away if everybody could just be switched to another team (or auto assigned at log in). Imagine fighting in a pitched battle for an airbase, and suddenly you're on the other side before you can win it. OR you fought for the team in the war, and shortly before it's finally won, you are suddenly on the other side.
Also, there is still a longer term strategic element to missions in AH, most notably the strats. I personally would feel very uncomfortable having successfully smashed some key installations in a daring 2 hour sortie and suddenly find myself on the side I bombed. There would be no point for me in such missions, which I enjoy quite a bit anymore, if I could not reap the 'rewards' of it afterwards.
I do switch teams, but it's always on a per map decision: When I first time log on a new map, I decide if I stay on this side, or if it's about time for a switch. But whatever my decision, I stay on that time for the whole remainder of this map.
Yes, some players already don't care about the war or the teams at all, but they are not in the majority. Note how few players are green on the roster despite the big perk incentive?
Ripping squads & teams apart like this would create quite an outrage, much more than the ENY complaints could ever do.
That's a fair critique and the reason I didn't address it is because the fact that there's a war going on isn't reflected in the arena half the time. The reality is wars are only being won because one faction is steamrolling another in the middle of the night. If I could hazard a guess, most players (who know about the strategic objectives) don't care because they realize whether they win or not depends more on which of the three teams ends up stacked that night.
As for longer strategic missions I don't think you'll ever get balanced just after landing one. If you do It'll just be really bad luck. Bomber pilots getting balanced doesn't make sense either because their sorties are so long chances are the balance is being called for while they're in flight or while they're AFK. The data is there to differentiate what pilots are doing most of the time, so an algorithm deciding who to balance can factor that in as well.
It's already been stated what can be done about squads and wingmen. Just don't balance them unless you can keep them together when you do balance them. Auto balance doesn't have to keep the team balance perfect, just within a certain margin. If the teams are mostly balanced in player count, then using ENY to make up the remaining difference should be fine. Honestly auto balance is probably what ENY needs to be better, Since the problems with ENY seem to arise when the teams are egregiously unbalanced.
-
Why do you believe that players want balance? This morning the numbers are 22 10 11, with half of the "10" attacking the "11" (and the other half defending against the "22"). Only one player was using the auto-switch. If players don't use the mechanisms that are available to promote more balance, I'd guess that forced balance would be very unpopular.
EDIT:
It just occurred to me that the "10" attacking "11" and ignoring the "22" could just as easily show that players do want balance.
So...nevermind. :headscratch:
-
Personally I like the people I fly with rooks and have been a rook my whole time with a few day long checks of the other sides. There are definitely some mentality differences between them.
I am also a win the war type player that prefers the strategy to the furball. I would probably not play as much if we were being forced to switch. I also do not think the eny is really that broken. Aside from some tweaks to the math and mostly that would be concerning plane values. I usually only play at night around 8-11 est, it’s rarely a big deal and when my side is affected by it I just find a new plane.
Most of the problems center around human nature not an algorithm… not much Dale can do about that.
-
Forced autobalancing was one of the (many) reasons I left WW2OL (iirc, it was so long ago).
-
Auto balancers should be rewarded better to encourage that behavior as it seems one of the easiest ways to make the game more enjoyable for most..
I say 10x, 20x, etc...whatever it takes..the perks for each sortie run when registered as an auto balance player...and a bottle of rum to boot!
Small map auto balanced could breathe new life into AH imo
:cheers:
Eagler
-
I like the Auto switch system somewhat. However when i used it i ran in somethings that annoyed me so is stopped using it.
Three of the main issues that i ran into where:
- When i was doing something and where having fun and died i found myself sometimes at the other front.
- I like to fly with my friends. If they are all scattered over the place i enjoy flying less.
- The ability to stop switching over and over withing 6 hours.
To fix this maybe we could have it so:
- There is a box that could pop up if the game wants to send you over to another country that you have to accept.
- A squad switch lock. You move together with your squad when there is a 3-4 (or more) player unbalance.
- A checkmark to enable these setting.
- An opt out option when you no longer wish to switch.
I think my silly squad would like this and make use of it, if it is designed this way.
-
I like the Auto switch system somewhat. However when i used it i ran in somethings that annoyed me so is stopped using it.
Three of the main issues that i ran into where:
- When i was doing something and where having fun and died i found myself sometimes at the other front.
- I like to fly with my friends. If they are all scattered over the place i enjoy flying less.
- The ability to stop switching over and over withing 6 hours.
To fix this maybe we could have it so:
- There is a box that could pop up if the game wants to send you over to another country that you have to accept.
- A squad switch lock. You move together with your squad when there is a 3-4 (or more) player unbalance.
- A checkmark to enable these setting.
- An opt out option when you no longer wish to switch.
I think my silly squad would like this and make use of it, if it is designed this way.
Good suggestions!
- oldman
-
I like using the autobalance feature, but the other players that do not use the feature are extremely loyal to their chess piece and chastise anyone that is autoswitched. From verbal abuse to refusing to help those players in all aspects. You'll have a tough sell forcing those type of players to be forcefully switched.
-
Forced autobalancing was one of the (many) reasons I left WW2OL (iirc, it was so long ago).
Force switched is why i ditched Battlefield, nothing more irritating than getting your clan together then, your on the other team every fing round.
I like using the autobalance feature, but the other players that do not use the feature are extremely loyal to their chess piece and chastise anyone that is autoswitched. From verbal abuse to refusing to help those players in all aspects. You'll have a tough sell forcing those type of players to be forcefully switched.
Those people have mental issues, you're trying to help balance the game so eny is at a minimum but they assume any that switches is a spy. I squelched those nuts.