Forced Team Autobalance

[gozulio]

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.

[CptTrips]

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.

[Mongoose]

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.

[CptTrips]

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.

[The Fugitive]

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.

[CptTrips]

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.

[popeye]

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..."    

https://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/index.php/topic,404990.msg5387747.html#new

[CptTrips]

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.

[gozulio]

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.

[Busher]

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.

[CptTrips]

No idea how automatic side balancing will help.

What about two-sides with auto-balancing?

[CptTrips]

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?

 

[sundowner25]

Needs 2 countries.

SunDown

[Lusche]

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.

[CptTrips]

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?