Suggestion: Banner balance (autobalance) based on winning percentage

[Phew]

Forms of this idea have been floated before, but I just wanted to get it out there again:

-Track each player's win percentage for each game type (battle/siege)
-Banner balance with the goal of attaining the same sum of winning percentages on each team, after some weighting term (I suggest squaring the win rate as a starting point, but this could be adjusted over time)

Example:

Team 1-
Bob (60% win rate)
Joe (50% win rate)
Ted (40% win rate)
.6^2+.5^2+.4^2=0.77

Team 2-
Bilbo (50% win rate)
Frodo (50% win rate)
Sam (50% win rate)
.5^2+.5^2+.5^2=0.75

Win percentage is a much more reliable indicator of a player's efficacy than their equipment cost, generation, level, points per round, etc., so it makes sense to balance based on this and this alone. Right now, we have a system where all the best players gravitate toward a few high population clans, so they can roll x5 all day. Balance based on winning percentage, and the more they win, the harder it will get to keep winning. Think of it like a salary cap in sports.

[Penguin]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't having a guy with a 60% win rate a lot more advantageous, even with a guy with a 40% win rate on his side?

[Phew]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't having a guy with a 60% win rate a lot more advantageous, even with a guy with a 40% win rate on his side?

Hence the squared term. With that adjustment, it's like saying a 60% win rate guy is worth 2.25 guys with a 40% win rate.

[Latvian]

i dont realy like this idea. Imagine situation i am worst player ever but i am in clan of good players, we play together and win all the time, but than they leave and i have high win percentage and i am balanced to losing team because i have this high win percentage and now i am forced to lose only because i was leeching succsess of my teammates. something like that

[Ronin]

Punishing the good skilled one even further, to equalize every player is not a good idea. Pure equality between people actually means a dystopia, not an utopia.

[Phew]

i dont realy like this idea. Imagine situation i am worst player ever but i am in clan of good players, we play together and win all the time, but than they leave and i have high win percentage and i am balanced to losing team because i have this high win percentage and now i am forced to lose only because i was leeching succsess of my teammates. something like that

You wouldn't be "forced to lose", since it's just as likely that you'd be balanced opposite another "leecher in a good clan".  If these people are so rare that there is never more than 1 on a server at a time, then they are hardly worth basing a balance system around anyway.

[Phew]

Punishing the good skilled one even further, to equalize every player is not a good idea. Pure equality between people actually means a dystopia, not an utopia.

And what type of "topia" is the status quo? Where new players/independent players/players in small clans lose every single round while the large clan rolls x5 all day? Those people end up just quitting the game, which is bad for everyone.

Most skilled/experienced players in large clans want to match up against a fair fight, because it's more fun than steamrolling some peasants (play DTV for that).

[Ronin]

I often look at the things if they would fit an utopia or not. You may disregard the last sentence.

Well I didn't put up a lot of thought into this, it might be a good solution for the big matchups. Though it will create problems of it's own. A guy with very high chance will be forced to join the bad team, until he loses and his ratio is getting dropped. I understand encouraging everyone having the same reward, but then there would be no point of playing better for the experienced players. Not for the rewards. Although a game has to keep bad players enjoying a game, it also has to offer some extra gifts to those who are doing extra work. A bit positive discrimination maybe, but I wasn't losing all of my rounds when playing siege back in the days everyone using a HRE banner; even though I wasn't using a HRE banner. On an unrelated note: I was even enjoying it somehow.

[CrazyCracka420]

Not sure if the solution would work with multiplier.  If the teams were balanced 100% of the time, we'd never get over x2.  That being said, I am one of the people who prefer to fight a good match rather than steam rolling the enemy team.  It's more fun that way.  And if my faction is the large faction steamrolling, I'd prefer to have it split us up somewhat. 

If I had the option I'd pretty much always join the side that was getting their asses pushed in just because I've always enjoyed a challenge and would like to try and turn the tide of battle for the underdogs.

[Ronin]

Well crazy cracka, you are an exception then. I personally like to keep my multi as high as possible and for that I want to win the round by any means. That also includes picking my fights, therefore picking the right servers. I play rageball mainly, but not because it is an extremely fun mode to play. The main reason why I play is, it is easy to milk x5 when half of your enemy team is deathmatching. (Not to mention once you have 2-3 agi builders in your team, it's pretty easy win.)

Because I need more xp to gain levels. Because the game is telling me to do so. The only reward is coming from multipliers, and that only comes if your team wins the round. For that reason, I very much preferring to fight against a weak team rather than a strong team. I'm not the only one thinking like this. Many people just wants to win, because it's rewarding. It does not matter who you are winning against. There is only one god in cRPG and that is the x5 in the left-bottom of your screen. As long as xp is flowing, I am happy. As long as it doesn't, I am generally not happy. That being said, the game encourages the players to win and earn xp. Not overcoming a challenge.

Xp and gold is the main reason why I play this mod. There are much better mods if we compare gameplay, if you're not a heavily armored 2hander of course. Well, at least in my point of view.
Archery feels bad enough, cavalry is in the middle ground (due to the nerfs to ranged), throwing is a joke, shielder is less useful, horse archery and horse xbow is out of comparision. Don't get me wrong, I think cRPG has it's own elements in gamebalance. I very much enjoying this infantry based game. But it does not offer the BEST gameplay there is. The game's main element is in the xp/gold system. That is the point here I'm trying to show you here.


Shortly saying, the rewarding system needs to be changed first. With this rewarding system, balancing the game even further is actually punishing the skilled players. I like challenges, but not in this mod.

[Teeth]

Well crazy cracka, you are an exception then. I personally like to keep my multi as high as possible and for that I want to win the round by any means. That also includes picking my fights, therefore picking the right servers. I play rageball mainly, but not because it is an extremely fun mode to play. The main reason why I play is, it is easy to milk x5 when half of your enemy team is deathmatching. (Not to mention once you have 2-3 agi builders in your team, it's pretty easy win.)

Because I need more xp to gain levels. Because the game is telling me to do so. The only reward is coming from multipliers, and that only comes if your team wins the round. For that reason, I very much preferring to fight against a weak team rather than a strong team. I'm not the only one thinking like this. Many people just wants to win, because it's rewarding. It does not matter who you are winning against. There is only one god in cRPG and that is the x5 in the left-bottom of your screen. As long as xp is flowing, I am happy. As long as it doesn't, I am generally not happy. That being said, the game encourages the players to win and earn xp. Not overcoming a challenge.

Xp and gold is the main reason why I play this mod. There are much better mods if we compare gameplay, if you're not a heavily armored 2hander of course. Well, at least in my point of view.
Archery feels bad enough, cavalry is in the middle ground (due to the nerfs to ranged), throwing is a joke, shielder is less useful, horse archery and horse xbow is out of comparision. Don't get me wrong, I think cRPG has it's own elements in gamebalance. I very much enjoying this infantry based game. But it does not offer the BEST gameplay there is. The game's main element is in the xp/gold system. That is the point here I'm trying to show you here.


Shortly saying, the rewarding system needs to be changed first. With this rewarding system, balancing the game even further is actually punishing the skilled players. I like challenges, but not in this mod.

What is wrong with you? Maybe a second job simulator like EVE online is more your thing.

I get bored and GTX when my team steamrolls the other team for too long. Guess that is the difference between playing for fun and playing because you want pixel rewards. I would love team balance based on this, also display win/loss ratio on the website please instead of k/d. If the teams are in perfect balance by win/loss ratio, it means you only help your team if you play above your average performance. So doing good compared to yourself helps your team, which is perfect in my opinion.

If individually the teams are completely balanced, then it's left to teamplay to tip the scales.

[Ronin]

Haha seems like you did not like my reasons. So I guessed. Well, everyone has their tastes I think. Don't get me wrong. I'm not criticizing or against the idea of a fully balanced system. It might be fun. But from the point of view I am standing, things look like a complete balance is a bad thing for me. If the only reward there is, gaining xp. In this kind of system I would do my best to keep my multi high - as long as I stick to the rules of course.
Let's take example of spawnraping. It is not done for fun (unless you're a sadist, which I am not). Or is it being done for fun? Haha! People got strange tastes, I'm not really sure if this is a good example. Nevermind then

I mostly try to fight in the way that I can gain the most benefit. Not granting a duel to the last survivor, going to the servers I will benefit most. For example if I see a DTV server with 29 people in Istiniar, I'd consider going there. Well, I go there! Most probably xp will be good, and bots will be killed quite nicely. Both for good reward and good teamplay ---> good game experience

It's in human nature. As long as there is a game, some people will play it to WIN. I'm not the only one doing that. All those people saying they supported every nerf but weapon turnspeed, are a proof to this.


Just change the rewarding system. Trying to maintain a full balance, with a win-oriented rewarding system is in confliction. If people should be treated as equals, there shouldn't be any possession or dominance difference.

If there are rewards for winning; Skill and templay should be encouraged, but less skilled players have to get decent rewards too. It's just that they need to do better to gain more rewards. This is balanced in itself. If there's no rewards for winning but a different system as a whole; I'd love to see a very good balance. Easy wins are not fun at all really.
Though the system we use is, lets say a 5v5:
-good player               -bad player
-good player               -bad player
-bad player                 -bad player
-bad player                 -bad player
-bad player                 -bad player

Good players begun to have high multiplicators. So lets divide them out with force, make one of them lose their multi. That's a punishment for being a good player. Not wrong maybe, but not fully correct either. The system that is offered here seemed like a ultra-global version of this to me.

Believe it or not, x5 is a god of cRPG like the money in real world. You may deny the god itself, but you can not deny the existence of a religion. There should be people worshipping this new god called x5. By the way, I claim myself to be the Papa of this religion. Give me 5k cRPG gold so I grant you the blessing of x5. For a 1 heirloom point, I would even bless people for x6. Haha!

(click to show/hide)

I just wanted to see your reactions by using such a truly honest post. Haha, seems like I got the results I expected. I know I am wrong in some parts. Balance is of course good. It's just that I like to be an oppositionist. That is what wrong with me

[Phew]

We already have an attempt at a balance system, it just balances based on equipment value (I think?), which has virtually no correlation to player efficacy. If we are going to have a balance system, why not have it based on something that actually correlates to player skill (like winning percentage)?

Ronin, we get it; XP/gold are more important to you than actually having fun. I believe you are in the minority within the crpg community. Like Teeth said, those people are best suited to other "games" that aren't even games (more like structured digital reward systems).

I'd like to keep this thread focused on potential team balance algorithms. If you don't like the one I suggested, feel free to suggest a different one, but I don't think this is the place for philosophical discussions.

[cmp]

We already have an attempt at a balance system, it just balances based on equipment value (I think?), which has virtually no correlation to player efficacy. If we are going to have a balance system, why not have it based on something that actually correlates to player skill (like winning percentage)?

Autobalance being based on equipment level is an old myth; it never worked like that. IIRC the current formula uses KD ratio from the last few days (or games, dunno) among other things.

[Phew]

Autobalance being based on equipment level is an old myth; it never worked like that. IIRC the current formula uses KD ratio from the last few days (or games, dunno) among other things.

Good to know. The current autobalance algorithm works well when the server is a bunch of randoms, it's when a big clan shows up that things get weird. If I had a dollar for every time it put the top-performing randoms on the same team as the clan that is rolling the server...

I've also seen people suggest that it should balance based on class (equal archers/cav per team), but that's a different discussion.

These "old myths" propagate because the game mechanics are usually released piecemeal by the devs in random forum posts (here and Taleworlds), which only sometimes make it into Elmokki's Game Mechanic Megathread.