cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: Dementia on February 09, 2014, 04:58:57 pm

Title: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Dementia on February 09, 2014, 04:58:57 pm: ^
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: El_Infante on February 14, 2014, 07:30:26 pm: Indeed. A thing we said on forums about 1 million of times. If clans want to play together for fuck's sake, go strategus. Because banner balance ruin the game and is the root of all whinings in balance forum. A public server should be for fun, not for having in the same team a stack of full experienced players and in the another one, randoms and peasants. In this situation, I log off from crpg because it's not fair and is so boring.

I said a lot of times that balance should be about classes. Distribute archers & cavalry on both teams equally. I'm 100% sure that it will improve crpg a lot. And is too easy to implement. But I don't hope any change in this balance because devs ignore us on his straight mind.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Grumbs on February 14, 2014, 11:56:00 pm: Banner balance increases the amount of teamwork you get and helps clans recruit more players because it gives a reason to be clanned. Most of the time its not the best clans vs the worst so not sure why people see it as such a problem. The better teams will still win without banner balance, you'll still get teams that do better than others..might as well let clans play together so they can come up with ways to counter the other team rather than having a true pub server which would be much more chaotic and disorganised
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Ronin on February 15, 2014, 11:36:23 am: I think the banner balance must be removed from public servers... and there should be a cRPG league for clan vs. clan competitions. Strategus is not the same thing.

This would also give a better idea about which classes are Over and Under powered.

If someone is up to the task of organizing a cRPG league among clans, I would support him with 2 loompoints.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: bavvoz on February 15, 2014, 12:34:14 pm: Removing banner balance is like saying f*ck you to ppl putting more effort into teamplay.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Matim on February 15, 2014, 01:25:23 pm: I'm sorry, but i want to have a possibility to play with my clanmates without relying on the luck. And remember that there are many clans plaing simultaneously. The problem is when there are two big, good clans on the one side :P
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Gravoth_iii on February 15, 2014, 02:07:24 pm: Everytime i play with my clan 1 or more people get balanced over to the other team, and even though we have multiple people on the same team it doesnt mean we are going to win every round. We actually lose quite a lot. Bannerbalance is rarely a problem, but is pretty silly if its 20v20 and one team is a full or 2/3 clannies, at 40v40 though and 10 or 20 people are in a clan makes a difference but not a massive one.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: 722_ on February 15, 2014, 02:30:33 pm: It would not be a problem if we could make changes to the way you earn gold & experience, but the way it works now just rewards whoever can banner stack the most with high level / good players, leaving everyone else on x1. tried playing battle last night and it was full of mercs and i was fed up of loosing so i went to siege and guess what

(click to show/hide)
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

(click to show/hide)
visitors can't see pics , please register or login

i understand people want to play together i just feel its possible to still do that without fucking everyone else over
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Kalp on February 15, 2014, 07:48:32 pm: I don't want to kill Hetman, I want to Kapikulu him :lol:
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Tomas on February 16, 2014, 11:57:26 am: The banner balance limit just needs setting at the size of the 4th largest clan online. That means it only really comes into play when both teams are going to have a significant number of clan players online that will try and play together.

This might also encourage people to join some of the smaller clans as in the huge clans you have a lower chance of consistently being on the same team.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Camaris on February 16, 2014, 02:25:50 pm: I like your idea tomas. I crush ever other hre so its obvious i want them on opposite team ;)
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Dementia on February 16, 2014, 06:38:21 pm: Clans are made to play together, not to pubstomp. I think this has to be the first game I play that adds pubstomping as an in-game mechanic.

If you guys want to play together, make your CRPG server, have clanwars, strategus, whatever, there's tons of possibilities. EU CRPG 2 is "be in grey team or lose", and it gets old really fast.

This just adds to the already way too long list of reasons new players don't stick to CRPG long.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Malaclypse on February 16, 2014, 06:56:15 pm: One of those things which has been said again and again and will never change because crybabies.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Panos_ on February 16, 2014, 06:59:39 pm: Knitler, Varadin and Qoray on the same time, Grey Order should be renamed to Macro Order

much skill.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: dreadnok on February 18, 2014, 02:21:04 pm: Most of us join clans for the sole reason to NOT rely on public players for teamwork
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Breidr on February 19, 2014, 06:37:34 am: Cannot agree with this enough. This is the one thing above all else that has stopped me from playing. too many games end in 0/20+ players left. 1x multiplier almost constantly. I've got better uses for my time. I guess this mod doesn't want new players and is just for clan stomping.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Rumblood on February 19, 2014, 05:28:05 pm: Join a clan for the banner. Its not like you have to do anything for 90% of the clans playing.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Jack1 on February 19, 2014, 05:46:07 pm: Stacks often make servers less fun for the teams not stacking and cause servers with normaly 80-90 players to go all the way down to 40.... The problem honestly needs to be solved...

Perhaps raising the repair costs/chances for any clan whom makes up over 30-40% of a team and if the clan makes up 60-70%+ of the team every loomed item breaks every round (as to target the usually more experienced players insted of the new ones)
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Crazyi on February 19, 2014, 06:20:44 pm: You form a clan to play together. The entire purpose of a clan is to play with the same group of people. If we didn't play together on the pubs, then when the hell are we going to play together? Strat only? Yea that is the best time to practice teamwork..... when the battle actually matters....

You want the all clans to go to another server so it can be 10v10 in the pub at prime time? It still wont be balanced, I promise. I play plenty at odd hours when the the clans aren't out en force, and one side still always dominates the other. It is a problem with the auto balance itself.

Im sorry man but simply saying clans should only be allowed to play together in Strat is stupid. I would like to see some greater degree of auto balance during round 2 to have equal sized/amounts of of clans on each team. I have mentioned this before but I highly doubt it shall happen.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: San on February 19, 2014, 06:51:30 pm: Meh, my clan gets switched and I fight them more often than not anyways. I think balance in General should get fixed first, even if it means temporarily disabling banner balance to put in the proper tweaks.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Breidr on February 20, 2014, 03:11:34 am: Quote from: Crazyi on February 19, 2014, 06:20:44 pm
You form a clan to play together. The entire purpose of a clan is to play with the same group of people. If we didn't play together on the pubs, then when the hell are we going to play together? Strat only? Yea that is the best time to practice teamwork..... when the battle actually matters....

You want the all clans to go to another server so it can be 10v10 in the pub at prime time? It still wont be balanced, I promise. I play plenty at odd hours when the the clans aren't out en force, and one side still always dominates the other. It is a problem with the auto balance itself.

Im sorry man but simply saying clans should only be allowed to play together in Strat is stupid. I would like to see some greater degree of auto balance during round 2 to have equal sized/amounts of of clans on each team. I have mentioned this before but I highly doubt it shall happen.

Have fun then. I've got better things to do than be fodder for pubstompers.

I mean, my NW regiment gets plenty of practice without stomping pubs, but whatever you have to tell yourself to sleep at night I guess.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sandersson Jankins on February 20, 2014, 05:27:24 am: Perhaps in EU the problem is Greys or Byz massively inflating one team with extremely experienced, high level, and skilled players but in NA very rarely does a clan garner enough numbers of highly influential players to completely overcome the other clans active at the time. Even if there are no more than 4-5 representatives of each clan maximum on the server the rounds often go 4-0 or 3-1, with dozens of players left on the winning team at the end. It's simply a problem with the autobalancer.

If you removed banner balance, you'd not only make a very sizable fraction (even perhaps a majority) of the community disenfranchised, maybe enough to quit, but you wouldn't solve the problem. The devs would need to code an extremely efficient auto-balancer, and I don't think doing such a thing is on top of, or even on their to-do list at all. I don't blame them in the slightest for that, either.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on February 20, 2014, 02:49:15 pm: to all you stackers who claim its because you want to "teamplay" (i still have no clue wtf you mean, every time i play(ed) i teamworked with my team or at least i tried.) please stop the endless "we wanna teamwork" argument, because it just doesnt hold water and its obvious you just lobbying for the x5 stacking.

(click to show/hide)
STRATEGUS
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on February 20, 2014, 02:51:45 pm: GO PLAY STRATEGUS!

i think it would be amusing if all the ones who dislike Banner Unbalance simply just quit the game. gl hf.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on February 20, 2014, 06:28:12 pm: me and others have whined about this for years really. but fuck it. ill finally stfu now. waste of time, lost cause. gaming freemasonry :lol:

edit: actually... when i started playing crpg i played with certain individuals who back then was clanless (like myself) we didnt have custom banners but banner (un)balance was indeed in effect. everyone could use the same banners though. when some clan (back then it was usally nord) stacked EU1, me and the guys i was playing with back then, whining like crazy on ts or was it skype; its unfair, its lame, screw nord and so forth. we had long talks about how unfair and lame it was. usally when we had enough we just logged out and picked the nord banner and leeched, to great annoyance to most of the real nord guys :lol:
funny thing is... the guys i played with back then have now joined a top3 clan and they are now against removal or change of banner (un)balance and/or the way we gain xp. funny :p

2+2
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: dreadnok on February 20, 2014, 06:49:36 pm: Quote from: Breidr on February 20, 2014, 03:11:34 am
Have fun then. I've got better things to do than be fodder for pubstompers.

I mean, my NW regiment gets plenty of practice without stomping pubs, but whatever you have to tell yourself to sleep at night I guess.

Your dopey. Majority of people on both teams are in a clan. The teams are never CLANS vs PUBS. Your in a REGIMENT in another game tho.makes sense
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Jack1 on February 21, 2014, 02:40:12 am: What about doing something like

Y=X*Z^W

Were
Y=value of banner stack to the team
X=total KDRs/point death ratios of all members of a particular banner
Z=something such as 1.02(when a banner stack has 20 people the value of the player will go up to 1.5*value compensating for the better cohesion than the enemy team which will either have another large stack or many unorganized people.)
W= number of members on banner

Using an equation like this one would mean that huge banner stacks that work well together would be given many less non stackers on their team or may just split the stack up overall while small banner group would have nearly no effect.

Edit: numbers may be changed based on average server populations(na1, na2, eu1, eu2, chn) being that a team of 8 can roll NA 2 and 30 are needed for EU1.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Varadin on February 22, 2014, 01:58:46 am: its not our fault cuse we are too good for other ppl , Try to get better and you might even beat us.

on the other hand new players rarly stays only cuse most of the others ppl are already high lvls got plenty of MW items, and are just too good for them , so there is no fun in being peasnt , non-skilled, and without money and lvls, thats why ppl quit. also game is pretty old.

i just pray to god that Melee:Battlegrounds will have at least few thousands active players and not like cRPG that has about 500 active ppl. ITs still ok and its still playable mod but i just find it so sad that i can recongize every fucking single name on siege or battle server, even on strategus you always know the guys that are fighting. Just imagine how fun and how would adrenaline hit you when you would attack or be attacked on strategus by some huge clan that you never heared of before, and never seen those guys before fighting,and now when i fight those "huge strat batles" i see for example some guy and i already know his playstyle, and that is what kills my fun actually, Would like to meet some other players high skilled, even skilled than me, that i never fought before and beat his ass IRL :)
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Panos_ on February 22, 2014, 02:04:34 am: Quote from: Waradin on February 22, 2014, 01:58:46 am
Would like to meet some other players high skilled, even skilled than me, that i never fought before and beat his ass IRL :)

such a humble guy.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on February 22, 2014, 02:08:19 am: penis i and im sure lots of other players have killed you plenty of times wara :) noone is immortal unless they bring aaaall their friends, which i assume you would too in an IRL 1vs1 fight

hre, grey, byz, nord, merc or whatever dude

:twisted:
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on March 29, 2014, 03:57:07 pm: the matchmaker have to act like it do, otherwise we wouldnt get any multiplier

the system bite its own tail, its mindblowing. and its on public servers! i would care shit if this was just on strat, but no, this clan feature is enabled on the entire server range! with it, there is very little competition going, its basicly 90% gangbang where winner takes it all within 2mins round, 5 rounds. and the other team just have to take the beating. and if they whine they will get QQ and so forth, we all know the drill. i think its fucked up guys. seriously.

imagine if we had some kind of true balance, red vs. blue. equal amount of classes and we all had the same income xp wise and valour-guys got some kind of bonus xp reward. then it would be about the fight and about winning just, well, to win! not to get multiplier or some other bullshit!

right now the right people knows how to get valour. if they get on the loose team, they will simply just get valour and care less about acutally winning, because, well, they know they are put on the loosing team. so the team will loose, because the star players is hiding on the key moments of the battle. and the reason why they hide is because they are put on the loosing team. they very well know how the matchmaker works.

the entire xp gain and matchmaking on the public servers is a joke guys. i know its abit more than the usual "gief moar items" but it would improve gameplay so much more.

edit: think about it! matchmaker is forced to team up highlevel fully loomed cav/range/shielder players!
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Thomek on March 31, 2014, 11:47:49 am: Sniger, I mostly play alone since Ninja is not exactly super active nowadays.. But I have almost never paid a thought to clans roflstomping the other team. It's not even very common. Byz, nords or grey also get roflstomped all the time.

The other day I witnessed a few outnumbered pecores kicking Nord ass, sweet moments. :)

I also, at least in my mind, change the outcome of rounds all by myself. The autobalance seems that good that 1 player can make a difference. Kite them, distract half enemy team, take out or distract key players. (Usually 1h cav..)

When other Ninjas are on, it's much more fun to play with them. Hacking a shielder or anyone to pieces with Khorin or other ninjas are priceless moments! :)

I think banner balance is overall for the good of the community, and creates more interesting combat. They can take the lead or have small groups fighting each other. Lot's of players are also complaining about unfair teams and banner balance.. :rolleyes: without realizing they are themselves a key player in the team, and can change outcome if they just changed their mindset and tactics.

Banner balance is not a real problem. Just in the head of bad performing players who need a scapegoat.

Also, join a clan as above poster said.. It's not like they require massive commitments nowadays. Byz and mercs seems to take any random scrub :)
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on March 31, 2014, 12:00:27 pm: when you have a system like the current multiplier system, you wont get xp when game is even. its retarded! you can EITHER get balance and no XP (or some XP if valour) or you can get shit balance and no xp/loads of XP. it is utterly silly system!
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on March 31, 2014, 12:10:18 pm: take a min. and think about:

players with same color are put in the same team DESPITE LEVEL and CLASS

"lets make a clan and invite everyone! have 20 lvl 35s stacking the public servers, weeeeee"
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: BlindGuy on March 31, 2014, 12:14:11 pm: Quote from: El_Infante on February 14, 2014, 07:30:26 pm
Distribute archers & cavalry on both teams equally. I'm 100% sure that it will improve crpg a lot. And is too easy to implement.

Im sorry, but your a fucking idiot. Its not easy to implement, it is IMPOSSIBLE to implement based on classes. Because there is no CLASS button.

Hovv do you define an archer? Having any povverdravv? so if I put ONE point in PD and no Proff in it, I get balanced as archer? If I'm 2h, and I take 2 PT and some darts, am I ranged or 2h? If I have a lvl 32 polespammer, and I hit lvl 33, put my 3 points into riding, am I cav? VVhat if I dont spanvv the horse, am I still cav?

There is no vvay to balance by classes in crpg, because there is no class definitions. Sure most archers take an 18/21 runavvay build, but some stand and fight vvith 18/18 and PS/IF, and they stab you. Are they still archers and should be balanced like a lvl 35 18/27 kitecunt?

Quote from: Thomek on March 31, 2014, 11:47:49 am

The other day I witnessed a few outnumbered pecores kicking Nord ass, sweet moments. :)

Dont lie, no you did not, Pecores have never ever kicked anyone's ass except their teammates.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on March 31, 2014, 12:43:42 pm: class balance could be looking at WPF as well as skills and the amount of them.

sure we can define archers, 2h/PA, cav, shielders AND HIGHLEVELS this way. why not?

example:
• an archer would have min. 3? PD and 100? WPF
• 2h would have min. 3? PS, 1? IF, 25? WPF
• level 31?+ devided evenly despite their class
so forth

again, just an example but i cant see how this would be hard to do comparred to the banner balance code chadz spawned
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: BlindGuy on March 31, 2014, 12:47:53 pm: Quote from: Sniger on March 31, 2014, 12:43:42 pm
class balance could be looking at WPF as well as skills and the amount of them.

sure we can define archers, 2h/PA, cav, shielders AND HIGHLEVELS this way. why not?

example:
• an archer would have min. 3? PD and 100? WPF
• 2h would have min. 3? PS, 1? IF, 25? WPF
• level 31?+ devided evenly despite their class
so forth

again, just an example but i cant see how this would be hard to do comparred to the banner balance code chadz spawned

I havent bothered to look at the bannercode but y vvould it need to be complicated? If banners same, same team. Done. Except motherfluffling Tommy: manages to break it EVERY FUCKING MAP and get put on other team no matter vvhat.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Angantyr on March 31, 2014, 05:03:02 pm: Quote from: Sniger on March 31, 2014, 12:10:18 pm
take a min. and think about:

players with same color are put in the same team DESPITE LEVEL and CLASS

"lets make a clan and invite everyone! have 20 lvl 35s stacking the public servers, weeeeee"
No, as far as I know balancer takes level into account, distributing it evenly across the teams, which as far as I can see takes precedence over banners which besides valour is why clan members are often spread over the two teams.

I don't particularly like the current balance scheme (though I think it is a pretty good try, better than what I've seen elsewhere in this engine). But I agree with Khorin that it isn't really due to banner balance which I actually think is an improvement on the servers (problem being more the way xp is gained imo). And I had the exact same opinion when I was clanless, I enjoy seeing some semblence of team work also on the enemy team.

Concerning xp gain I think it is important to view everything above x1 as a bonus, and be content with just getting x1, and base one's expenses accordingly. To be honest, I rarely look at my multiplier, I play this game solely for each individual fight, for being part of a medieval battle wielding medieval weaponry in four-directional combat, and my own personal battle, killing as many opponents as possible helping as many team mates in the process in spite of the overall outcome of the battle.

I've been clanless for a long time, then using Nord banner when next to no Nords were active, so I know how it feels to play mostly against clans (and even now in a bigger clan I mostly play outside prime time). And this was even a time when there was open banner leeching so anyone could use the banner currently in numbers (which I argued against like many others). But I also fought *with* clans at the same time. This continued 'clans vs public' argument doesn't hold water, as anyone who would care to look with open eyes would know. Yes, the game can be frustrating if you play to grind xp and play for too many hours in a row. WB is more like Planetside than for example CS in regards to balance, every fight isn't 'balanced' (usually because of blob vs smaller blob or class or skill superiority on one team) in the same way and really isn't supposed to be, but that is just one battle in the overall war, you lose some and you win some. The game itself can be very frustrating as most players will agree, but this doesn't mean it can all be attributed to strawmen like 'clans vs pubs'.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on March 31, 2014, 09:04:27 pm: yeah the uneven results is good only because we have the gay multiplier system.

i just dont think we will gain many new players with this. also its pretty fucking boring to play a game where you pretty much know the result beforehand. :?
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: CrazyCracka420 on March 31, 2014, 09:42:02 pm: Quote from: Dementia on February 09, 2014, 04:58:57 pm
^

The algorithm could very easily have balanced teams while still "trying" to keep clans relatively on the same team. But balanced teams should never come at the expense of clan stacks.

The team balance system has been shit for years. Sometimes the top players on the losing team are transferred to the winning team. A couple weeks ago myself and San were on the losing team (losing 1-2) and at the end of the round we were transferred to the team that was winning. San and myself had the highest two scores of both teams, and it moved us from the losing team, to the winning team (when we lost the round and went down 1-3).

There's been so many instances of fail with the team balance system I couldn't begin to count or give a recounting of them. I am as competitive a player as you will find. When I would pub counter-strike (which I loved to do), I would almost always universally join the losing team, or the harder of the two sides for each map that it went to. I hate pub stacks, they are terrible. And the team balance system is intentionally stacking teams in crpg.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Revernd_Gorice on April 28, 2014, 01:58:50 pm: "puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea."
yes autoblance is just worser then native and this wasnt easy to achieve surely .... :mad:
i simply have to say again:

Quote
still "trying" to keep clans relatively on the same team.
...and this is the problem
-because it is pressing on every free non clan gamer and every smaller clan at the public gaming servers already.

-Not only that clan trained teamwork with ts and all the jazz would be unfair enough for the team who has none it even gives differences about 10+ more gamers at xactly the team who has the clanstack too.

- Even the multiplier resest doesnt work or helps at most times.

_So if you are no or small clan gamer and you dont want to serve or /and profit within dominating clan it is the next conclude not to play.

Cheers Reverend_Gorice
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Angantyr on April 28, 2014, 08:53:41 pm: Sometimes I wonder if making team balance completely random like in Native (except for some script to take levels into account), would be a better option than trying to 'force' balance as cRPG tries to. At least then there's no one to blame.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 08, 2014, 06:20:01 pm: random will always be better than knowing wtf is going to win. its pretty idiotic, if you played the mod enough you learn how the matchmaker works and it just generate a majority uneven bullshit 4-0 or 4-1 maps. if you get on the the losing side you very well know that you are going to get your ass kicked for at least the next 3 rounds. if luck strikes, you may win a round but from that point is even more rape.

joining server
getting into map that ends in max 2 rounds
playing random till next map
playing the first random round and lose
seeing im getting on the loser team, ALT+F4 cos i simply cba getting raped for this map and prolly the next one as well, rather play something else.

yeah i actually agree i too think that random balance would be better than banner balance. majority of the 1st rounds is despite every logic, surprisingly even. i think we should try random balance just for a while, just so that we can say "ok it didnt work very well, fuck it" or "hey! W T F ! ! ! this fucking awesome! pras random!!"

but noone is up for even TRYING stuff out, everyone is more concerned in buff my item and buff my class or nerf his class or nerf her weapon. its fucked up guys. its fucked up.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Nehvar on June 08, 2014, 08:05:57 pm: The god-awful autobalancer likely drives more players away from this mod than anything else. Like Sniger mentioned, maps tend to end with a score of 4-1 or 4-0 more often than not. If you find yourself frequently on the "unstacked" team the game quickly loses all sense of fun. You really can't blame people for leaving the mod after they've experienced the wrong end of the autobalancer repeatedly. So if you want to keep losing players left and right...then by all means keep it as it is.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Thomek on June 08, 2014, 08:15:25 pm: If you get on "the wrong end" of autobalancer that much, it means you don't do much for your team. Either in kills or other ways. You would most likely be on the loosing team even if balance was completely random.

I'm playing alone most of the time and I have zero complaints. I also try and often succeed in turning the tide for the team. Sometimes I command.

I like the challenge of being against a stack be it siege or battle.

Some people think they are entitled to a 50/50 win loss ratio. You are not, you have to earn it no matter how fair the autobalancer is made.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Nehvar on June 08, 2014, 10:02:09 pm: Really? That's what this is going to devolve into? "You're a noob."? That's your argument? I usually, connection willing, don't average out on the bottom two-thirds of my team. So what do you expect me to do then? Turn on god-mode and single-handedly kill half the other team? Share with us your magnificent wisdom as to why the autobalancer should remain broken.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 08, 2014, 10:28:37 pm: thomek can i have the game you are playing?

im often in top half or top 1/3 (if im not top1 :D) and i dont really recognize wtf you are typing there lol

i think that thomek needs to demand a little bit more from his games. i think thomek has been in the shit too long, now he is use to it.

kind of stockholm syndrome :lol:
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Kafein on June 09, 2014, 12:02:05 am: Quote from: Thomek on June 08, 2014, 08:15:25 pm
If you get on "the wrong end" of autobalancer that much, it means you don't do much for your team. Either in kills or other ways. You would most likely be on the loosing team even if balance was completely random.

I'm playing alone most of the time and I have zero complaints. I also try and often succeed in turning the tide for the team. Sometimes I command.

I like the challenge of being against a stack be it siege or battle.

Some people think they are entitled to a 50/50 win loss ratio. You are not, you have to earn it no matter how fair the autobalancer is made.

That's just not how cRPG's teambalancer works Thomek. Being part of a bannerstacking clan increases your odds of winning hugely, regardless of whether your are good or not as individual. That's unfair with respect to other players of the same level of skill.

If anything being a good individual player makes the odds of you getting multi smaller, because independent good players are often put on the pub team, while the bottom of the leaderboard is mostly random. So in a situation where the clan stack wins every round (which is pretty damn common these days), you are better off being a bad pub than a good pub.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Thomek on June 09, 2014, 02:55:48 am: The losses and unfairness caused by bannerbalance are minimal.

Very important factors for your wins and losses are:

* Ranged/cav in team composition have influence
* The average skill and general composition of the team
* the map and starting positions
* Your own performance
* Ranged reticule randomness aka luck
* Teamwork willingness of either team
* Wether the sheep turns left or right.
* Most of all, your own performance and teamwork or commanding

The gains to gameplay caused by bannerbalance are great:

* Actual teamwork and ideas getting implemented causing variation and interesting situations.
* The fun for the clan players in cooperating.

Solution if you have a problem:
* Start commanding or simply chatting in teamchat, or signaling, hanging on to other players. Do Teamwork. There is this merc shielder (forgot nick) who manages to create "A clan" even when he plays alone. People follow him because they know he's good and never dies.

* Join a clan. They don't ask much if anything these days, they have armories, they can fix you up in strat battles, and you get to "leech the banner".

Sorry, imo this percieved problem lies mostly in the head of people looking for something to blame their losses on.

I've only played this for 4 years, probably mostly alone, and I cannot recall more than a handful of times where clanstacking truly was unfair or impossible to beat.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: San on June 09, 2014, 03:02:53 am: As long as ranged, melee cav, ranged cav, and infantry are somewhat similar in number, I think most other aspects would work themselves out, with more emphasis on the ranged classes. Melee has so many gear options that they can counter each other easily with a simple gear shift.

Quite often a map favors one side (or a certain team composition that a side coincidentally has). Other times, the team doesn't work together in a way that utilize their strengths. For instance, they may fight in the open when the other team has cav dominance, or the support from their own team's cav/range dominance is hindered by the location of the fight. You'll still see problems under perfect balance, but it should still make some sense anyways.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Kafein on June 09, 2014, 11:31:24 am: Quote from: Thomek on June 09, 2014, 02:55:48 am
The losses and unfairness caused by bannerbalance are minimal.

How comes clan stacks can maintain x5 during hours then ?
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Teeth on June 09, 2014, 12:09:43 pm: A group of players from the same clan as a huge effect on the cohesion of the team, which in turn has a huge effect on the winning chances of a team. Even if there are like 4 Byzantiums on, our easily recognizable banner and us usually picking a direction early ensures many people follow us. Creating a rapetrain not actually consisting out of clannies, but people following the clannies. We make decisions when to fight and when not to fight and the randoms usually follow us in these decisions. If a team consists of only randoms without communication, nobody wants to go in alone, people spread out, run away and then the team loses. This effect oon cohesion that a group with the same banner has, regardless of their individual skill or level, should not be understated.

If you find yourself on the non-stack team you are usually losing because of a lack of cohesion, people running away and not fighting when they should, not because of a disadvantage in skill. Our stack usually fucking sucks these days, but we create cohesion nonetheless and win. This also means that you as a solo player can beat the stack by inspiring cohesion in your team. I have done this myself countless of times, throwing out a a quick 'FOLLOW BAT 1' and then going somewhere usually has half the team following you. Most randoms like cohesion, they just don't know how to achieve it. The group of 12 clannies suddenly doesn't seem so strong when faced by a cohesive group of randoms.

Banner balance can work fine as long as it takes the effect a banner group can have into account. A player part of a banner stack should be regarded as a bigger player by the balancer than he would have been if he were to be judged individually. This creates teams that are always stacked against the banner group, which means that banner groups that are simply stacking will get absolutely wrecked because of a disadvantage in sheer skill and levels. I think the balancer should even do unfair team numbers. Put 40 against 32 players or something. I don't mind, I love a challenge.

For those people that are saying that clans should not be able to play together, fuck off you anti-social bastards. I don't have half the fun playing on my own as I have playing with my buddies on the same team.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 09, 2014, 12:40:25 pm: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: i regret clicking to read that teeth, i really do. what a load of crap, seriously.

but sure i agree, its more fun to rape than being raped. quit the lame "ohdoh i wanna play with my clan matez ohdoh i like teamwork ohdoh"

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

"But, your honor, we were teamworking"

you are justifing your fucking unfair gameplay spamming "TEAMWORK TEAMWORK".

please.

:lol:
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 09, 2014, 12:44:46 pm: its like being part of a 3rd division lowlevel football team. every time you go to club to play, you are facing a 1st division dreamteam. and this dreamteam is whining when you say that you dont wanna play them.

WTF PISS OFF
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 09, 2014, 12:48:25 pm: also you are saying that a random team cant win because its random. you have been in the shit for too long. you are use to the way of banner balance, you are using it to the max. of course you say like you do! its only naturel to be biased in your situation.

real gamers have hivemind. they have the ability to teamwork with randoms.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 09, 2014, 12:54:09 pm: fucking pissing me off. you are fucking manipulating. making it sound so innocent "just a couple of friends having fun playing toghter, not their fault that all the socalled "randoms" follows us creating massive blob rapetrain".

but thats just how it is when you are a good writer and know your words. you are able to manipulate and fuck around painting colorful mirages
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Umbra on June 09, 2014, 12:56:07 pm: I have been a pub for some time now. Never had that much of an issue with this. I think its confirmation bias again.

I mean, no1 remembers the countless rounds where the balance was ok, you just remember the ones when you got roflstomped.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Teeth on June 09, 2014, 01:23:38 pm: Wow, Sniger can you stop going full retard about this all the time and quit projecting mentalities onto everyone that is in a clan. I hate being on the stacking team as much as on the other team, some of my best experiences in this game have been trying to beat the stack by motivating my teammates or teamworking with my clanmates. If there was a button to switch myself to the losing team I'd probably be one of the people using it the most. Winning easily is boring in any game and I don't give a fuck about a multiplier. It is clear that you can't see past your own little delusions about how the world works, so please stop spamming them in 12 million posts.

Hell I am even arguing against current banner balance and stating that banner groups have a huge influence on the chance of their team winning and should be balanced as such, yet you manage to read only 'banner balance is fine' in there.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 09, 2014, 04:10:06 pm: Quote from: Umbra on June 09, 2014, 12:56:07 pm
I mean, no1 remembers the countless rounds where the balance was ok, you just remember the ones when you got roflstomped.

heres how it is: you log on and then you are forced to take the beating for 30-50mins, after that you will get pretty ok x5, too much x5 if you ask me! BUT ITS FUCKED UP! NOONE CBA TO BE RAPED FOR 30MINS BEFORE THEY CAN START TO PLAY. lol :)
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 09, 2014, 04:15:33 pm: its about fucking time someone goes full retard on banner balance and every single BB fanboy. this abusive shit has been going on for years. i admit when we had 100+ players (200+ were best) BB were alot better than it is now (i still didnt like it) but we DO NOT have 200+ players, nor 100+ players, we are happy if we have fucking 50 players!! AND WHY?! BANNER FUCKING BALANCE!

YES ITS ABOUT TIME SOMEONE TAKE ONE FOR THE TEAM AND GO COMPLETELY FULL RETARD OVER THIS SHIT

im not the only with these thoughts, but everyone else shut up and keep quiet cos they wanna keep their cool or they afraid of community retaliation both on forum but also ingame.

im taking one for the team and turn on full retard mode. im fucking tired of this shit. fucking lobbyists. sure, im getting TKed and THed and no help in-game, cool, im a martyr. honestly i dont give a flying fuck anymore.

:lol:
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 09, 2014, 04:19:39 pm: YOUR GAME IS NOT FAIR. PEOPLE DO NOT WANT TO PLAY IT.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on June 09, 2014, 04:20:59 pm: in crpg community you are a majority, but IRL you are very minority.

the reason for lack of players.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Grumbs on June 10, 2014, 09:40:23 am: When do you ever see Nords on the same team as Byz, Greys, Druzina, Mercs and Fallen and whatever other active clans? Theres usually a few active clans on and they very rarely play on the same side as each other. If they are its because theres some other big active clans on the other team. Its usually Nords vs Byz or Mervs vs Greys or whatever. Getting rolled in those instances is to do with team confidence and tactics. If your team loses 2 in a row their morale gets recked, the other team senses that they are stronger and it snowballs.

You see people doing the same tactics over and over even when it fails 3 in a row. You see people charging into the open when they have weaker cav. Charging ranged when you have flag spawn areas. Thinking you can't lose because you have more players and then the other team clutches. Without clans playing together these instances will be 10x worse. Winning will come down to luck. Most clans don't have all their players at the same skill level. They will have some monster players and some average. Without clans playing together the truly best players in the mod will end up on the same team as each other. You will get Chase with Saxon or Qoray with Phase or all together. The game will try to balance but it won't see how each player multiplies the effectiveness of the other. Some people can just coast through a round and then switch themselves on during clutch situations and perform outside their abilities. The autobalancer is never going to be able to account for everything and the bad players will be really at the mercy of the balancer when they have no team cohesion and less teamwork than now
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sniger on July 18, 2014, 03:26:08 pm: visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Tydeus on July 18, 2014, 04:01:42 pm: 4 PM ET, not 2 PM.
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: Sagar on August 07, 2014, 07:25:07 pm: Remove banner balance and make it kill ratio balance.
Also, replace "Choose Faction" with "Join" button.
(click to show/hide)
visitors can't see pics , please register or login
Title: Re: An autobalance that puts clans together on public servers is a terrible idea.
Post by: San on August 09, 2014, 12:46:00 am: Can you paste the code you changed during the test, Tydeus?