PDA

View Full Version : TEAMS! Auto-balance anyone?



dazza9806482
06-02-2005, 11:05 AM
Hi guys

Gripe time. Greatergreen is a brilliant server one of many. Yet my last few games have been ruined by a staggering and ridiculous Luft advantage.

It seems server admins and map-makers go to great pains to make fantastic missions with objectives and a real sense of design, which is promptly ruined by a massive numbers imbalance.

it really is amazing that people join servers where there is something like 15 blue and 5 red (or even vice versa), and think 'but i love the BF109, I am an ace, and i wont try anything else'

Pleas on the server make me sound like a moany bastard, which i maybe am, but i just cant help thinking the servers purpose is ruined by this air quake mentality.

what does anyone else think?

I would point to the UK dedicated server as again well run, but luckly also policed by admins who will force guys to change.

not always possible i admit.

anyone know of a full switch historical server that doesnt suffer this problem?

by the way i am truely grateful that the work others do to make online a usually a fantastic experience...

gripe over http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif
counter strike autobalance would be great!

'but i wanna be a terrorist!'

JG54_Arnie
06-02-2005, 11:12 AM
Yeah, its badly needed actually. I agree with you completely and people just wont get it into their heads to even change teams when you mention it, bar a few heros. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

F19_Olli72
06-02-2005, 11:49 AM
And i hate the snotty replies one gets when asking for even teams. "Its war" is the usual one. Of course,,,thats just the short version for: "im a pointprostitute, so no.. i wont switch over"

It would be interesting to know if the stats were removed (even just temporary as a test) would it still be the same?

Id like autobalance too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif Maybe it wouldnt be good for squads on DF servers like GG, but then again...they shouldnt "rape the server" as it was called in my RTCW days.

csThor
06-02-2005, 11:58 AM
Won't work. If people are forced to switch sides and fly planes they don't want to fly they'll leave. At least I'd leave and look for a new playground.

NorrisMcWhirter
06-02-2005, 11:58 AM
Hi,

Player balances are extremely unfortunate (as dishonourable as chute killing, really) but not entirely confined to the blue side; I've just left a map with an red advantage of 15 to 8.

In a way, it's actually has some benefits for those wishing to have neutral (in terms of equipment advantage) maps as a consistent player imbalance usually indicates an advantage to one side.

Perhaps the most unfortunate thing about player imbalance (speaking as an admin) is that you _have to ask_ people to balance it up. They should know better.

Cheers,
Norris

JG54_Arnie
06-02-2005, 12:06 PM
Originally posted by csThor:
Won't work. If people are forced to switch sides and fly planes they don't want to fly they'll leave. At least I'd leave and look for a new playground.

Then they should leave, they wont be missed. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

Some difference in numbers should be allowed, but often people let it get out of hand and 20 vs 5 is not uncommon. You dont think people should switch sides then?

F19_Olli72
06-02-2005, 12:13 PM
Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Hi,

Player balances are extremely unfortunate (as dishonourable as chute killing, really) but not entirely confined to the blue side; I've just left a map with an red advantage of 15 to 8.


Norris, your correct it happens to whatever side, but interesting is that its usually the same players. On Greatergreen for example, check what happens on Tuesdays ( think it is).

Thats Pacific rotation day, on an early pacific maps....usually red team has most players. And very few players will fly the more challanging planes like Ki-43 against Spits (did i say 99,99% of the red players will choose Spit?).

Now, look what happens if it switches to Pacific late....suddenly everyone seems to want to fly Ki-84 even the Spitpilots from the previous map...go figure.

Uberplane syndrome, i see a lot of pilots online who only wants to fly the 'best' plane. Instead of a fun challanging time on the server, it seems that the majority (or so it feels sometimes) only want to rack up easy kills to see their name on the top pilot list on the statspage.

Adlerangriff
06-02-2005, 12:24 PM
as dishonourable as chute killing, really


You are so right about this. It would be much more realistic if the PT boats came in and straffed the pilots in the water as they land.

NorrisMcWhirter
06-02-2005, 02:01 PM
tbh I do have some sympathy with people as they will naturally want to fly the plane they know inside out. For example, and it's not a good analogy I know, Eric Hartmann didn't have to chop and change his plane and risk getting easily bagged as a result as he messed around wondering why he couldn't get any decent climb out of his unfamiliar ride etc.

I'd have to say that, IMO, Spits are the primary cause of imbalance as they exists on so many maps and people must think it's an easier option. I dare say there are a lot of good Spit pilots around who know it inside out but they are more than outweighed by those that don't. I'd say that probably 90% of player imbalances concern a relatively small group of aircraft comprising the Yak3, 109G6, La7, La5FN and Spitfires.

You're right about the Ki84, also; another notorious aircraft but one which is not so uber as it was before.

Ta,
Norris

lbhskier37
06-02-2005, 02:09 PM
I've always noticed it in the latewar western front servers. Once in a while I will get the urge to fly a P47 or P38, but it seems that whenever I do these servers are like 25 to 5 with 4 people flying K4s, 1 poor sap in a HE or Stuka, and 25 people in P51s and spits. It usually makes me remember why I usually fly co-ops.

tplynn
06-02-2005, 03:20 PM
Even the Teams............NO! As if the "teams" were even during the war. It seems that more and more servers are going "full real" which is cool by me. I'm sick of seeing even the teams typed. I'm sure the Japense or Germans would have loved to "even the teams!" I love a target rich environment, you better keep your head on a swivel. I for one won't play on an "even the teams" server. So please 334th don't change a thing your server is fine the way it is! MudMarine VMF-214, Semper Fi

JG54_Arnie
06-02-2005, 03:53 PM
So you think its cool to fly 25 vs 5? http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/blink.gif

lbhskier37
06-02-2005, 03:56 PM
I just don't understand how it can be fun for the guys on the 25 side of it? What are your chances of even seeing an enemy with odds like that?

JunkoIfurita
06-02-2005, 04:51 PM
Heh heh, exactly http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I for one don't mind if they don't bother evening teams on servers like 334th, anyway. Whenever you see an imbalance like 20-6, the team with greater numbers will predictably have 10 or so pilots grubbing around at ground level.

So I just jump on the 'underdog' team, get some height and have fun anyway http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif The thing is, the pilots flying around at altitude are the competitive ones you want to play against anyway!

I don't see massive imbalance SO much on Greatergreen, but when you do the situation is typically the same. Although GG is a much better server all round, I'll say that for sure.

----

vocatx
06-02-2005, 05:19 PM
I would have to agree that the imbalance gets WAY out of had some times. It's been my experience, in my short time on-line, that when I fly the Axis side is usually out-numbered, but not always. When people rotate in and out of servers such as Warclouds with it's death-kick, it's going to be unbalanced by two or three at any given time, but the three to one I see sometimes is rediculous.

I logged on to one server the other night and it was two to one in favor of the red side. I usually fly Axis, so I got to try out some planes I hadn't flown much, if at all. I do understand some people are used to flying one plane or another, but it WOULD improve the game-play if people wouldn't mind changing sides from time to time. I know it's frustrating to spend an hour trying to make all the teams' objectives, and then go to the other side and try to help them win, but it's all in fun...isn't it?

VW-IceFire
06-02-2005, 05:42 PM
Originally posted by NorrisMcWhirter:
Hi,

Player balances are extremely unfortunate (as dishonourable as chute killing, really) but not entirely confined to the blue side; I've just left a map with an red advantage of 15 to 8.

In a way, it's actually has some benefits for those wishing to have neutral (in terms of equipment advantage) maps as a consistent player imbalance usually indicates an advantage to one side.

Perhaps the most unfortunate thing about player imbalance (speaking as an admin) is that you _have to ask_ people to balance it up. They should know better.

Cheers,
Norris
Don't think that'll help Xeno. Try 334th or 325th...both teams have exactly the same types of aircraft with even positioning of bases and the whole deal. To the point where its sort of boring and both teams are identical...but the shocking, stunning, and stupid thing is....that the teams are always unbalanced!!! I can't even figure it out...always end up with 20 red vs 10 blue or vice versa...the color really doesn't matter...people joing a game have the responsibility of checking to see who is down in numbers and pick that side to compensate. But they don't...

...so it seems to have little to do with percieved advantage of one side over another although that can be a factor. Some guys only fly one color because of the aircraft types available to them...I think thats very shortsighted...but when you goto a place where the two colors have the same planes it becomes totally inexcusable. And puzzling.

Force balancing...I'd go for it. I'd hope that the system had a way of managing it. I mean, if I were first in the server and was playing a scenario for 1 hour as blue and the teams become unbalanced by new people joining with less than 5 minutes time...I'd hope that it'd switch them before me. And vice versa.

tplynn
06-02-2005, 06:00 PM
Do I think its "cool" to fly 25 vs 5....It happens. I've flown against those odds, so what. What's the worst thing that could happen? You'd get shotdown and respawn, OUCH! Heaven forbid someones ace attitude/ego gets damaged. Did anyone ever think that it may force out numbered pilots to use better teamwork/tactics to combat the odds? I guess not, that would mean less selfish behavior. Selfish behavior is one of the biggest problems in the IL-2 community, ie shoting over peoples shoulder, kill stealing etc. I will fly the side and aircraft I choose. I refuse to let someone else tell me what I should fly. I think it's fun flying against a formation of B-17's. I'm sure that 109/190 pilots knew they were vastly outnumbered but did it anyway. I'm sorry you don't agree with me but that's okay I understand your view. Find a server that has autobalance. I just would like the 334th to stay the same. Semper Fi, VMF-214 MudMarine

HorribleSailor
06-02-2005, 06:28 PM
Maybe I'm seeing a pattern where there isn't one, but have noticed on the servers I fly that:

US v Japanese = more fly red, patriotism?

Allies v Japanese = fairly even? Poor early war allied aircraft put people off?

Germans v Russians = more fly blue, no sense of nationalism therefore people prefer to feel elite rather than one of many?

Allies v Germans = red advantage or even, again patriotism, but less so than the hatred of the Japanese?

(The servers I fly seem to be US/UK/Aus dominated.)

Jumoschwanz
06-02-2005, 07:13 PM
I vote for no team auto-balance. It is un-realistic, as in real war you never now what you will be up against for certain. You could make it an option for the more arcade servers I suppose, but I would hope that servers who strive for realism would not go for it.

As far as the unbalance changing back and forth from red to blue, this historically has changed with each patch. If a new patch makes the 190 and 109 hard to fly, you will see a mess of poeple migrate to VVS and allied planes.

The 109 is easier to control on the edge than it has been in past patches of FB, and everyone is flocking to it.

In one early FB patch the 109 was so hard to turn fight with it was just the opposite it is now, everyone flew red!

So wait for 4.0, I am sure there will be another re-shuffling of the populations of the online servers. S!

Jumoschwanz

TX-Gunslinger
06-02-2005, 07:25 PM
I have another complimentary solution for the problem (I think). Not that the autobalance idea is bad at all. In fact, perhaps that should be implemented as a server side option. Greater Green is one server I don't mind flying Red on. It has a lot of variety, and I love it for that.

It would also be helpfull to me, to see through Hyperlobby or All-Seeing Eye, just what the balance was in a particular game from "outside" prior to entering. There are many servers that I enjoy. War Clouds, Greater Green, Gennadich, PROWAR, etc..., I'd just like to know in advance which ones have too many blue, which ones have too many red etc....

Then, I could make my choice prior to coming in. I always feel a bit "guilty" when the red side is down in numbers. This situation usually rights itself over time, and quite frankly I don't mind flying 8 blue against 21 red. It's good for my development as a pilot.

Additionally, you guys may not be considering another situation, that of "teams" of flyers. Sometimes, squads will come in as a group. Where do they go to fly together? When a squad comes into a server, with 8 pilots, and wants to fly as a team, some intital imbalance usually happens. Of course, they could make better server choices if they had an idea of the balance prior to entering.

Yes, I do fly red sometimes (empahsis on sometimes), and the more I fly this sim, the more "colorblind" I'm becoming. But to be quite frank, there are some servers where I don't want spend "quality time" with the red guys who normally inhabit said server. Not on comms, not on the same team, not anywhere. That is one or two servers not most servers, and I could say the same about "blue teams" on other servers, that I don't want to fly with...

Many of us, fly with our friends. These are friends that we have developed over the years in this sim...it's just that simple. Visit with your buddies and off a few airplanes, etc...

I used to come and go quite frequently through the servers to ensure that the balance was equal before I joined. This takes some time and is a pain. I used to go to that trouble all the time, just to see the sides shift in favor of the "other color", 5 minutes later.

So, in closing, a lot could be achieved by Hyperlobby and ASE changes so that we could see the status of a server prior to joining, and implementation of the great idea of AUTOBALANCE. I'm sure many server admins would use that feature, particularly Greater Green.

S~

LeadSpitter_
06-02-2005, 10:14 PM
dont worry once a pacific map comes up they all leave then theres 10 red and 3 blue left.

All the servers are like that unfortunatly 30 blue 10 red or worse, then usually 11pm-12pm its the opposite more reds or even.

Autobalance is needed i think and i enjoy flying for anyside, im always going to the team with less players. I dont think the german only pilots would like an autobalance feature forcing them to try allied for a change.

hobnail
06-02-2005, 10:48 PM
Originally posted by dazza9806482:
Hi guys

Gripe time. Greatergreen is a brilliant server one of many. Yet my last few games have been ruined by a staggering and ridiculous Luft advantage.

I stopped reading after this, was it worth it to press onwards?

dazza9806482
06-03-2005, 12:55 AM
Probably not http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

but unless someone is going to be kind enough to give you a kind of brief synopsis, your never going to know are you?

maybe i should get an impressive sig and nickname......

Some goods points guys, especially Gunslingers suggestion that maybe hyperlobby could show the relative imbalance.

I also understand that many guys like to fly in teams and work together.

I all the sides equally, tho some planes I prefer, the main thing is when i join a server I look at the teams and join the weaker one

not that this is necessarily good for them! http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

massive imbalance i suppose was a fact of war, but this is a game. a realistic game, but a game nonetheless. The issue is that most servers have really excellent missions and well designed objectives...that are then rendered meaningless by the air quake crowd.

Im all for realisim but i dont recall many major battles that were simply fighter engagements with no tactical purpose involving no other plane type?

who wants to fly a b25 with 3 fighters covering and 15 mk108 toting point *****s?

not only that whilst some guys are so massively skilled that they laugh in the face of insurmountable odds, when im flying red say LA5 against numerous FW and BF's how do you fight?

BnZ? in a slower plane? against 4-1 odds?

bollocks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

F19_Olli72
06-03-2005, 02:12 AM
Originally posted by Jumoschwanz:
I vote for no team auto-balance. It is un-realistic, as in real war you never now what you will be up against for certain. You could make it an option for the more arcade servers I suppose, but I would hope that servers who strive for realism would not go for it.

No offense meant, but the whole "its war" argument is silly. If its war, when your plane is on fire do you pour gasoline on you and torch yourself? Do you kill yourself after you die? Real pilots never respawned you know.

Also if its realism the "its war" advocates wants Blue side would never have numerical advantage after 1943 - 44. Yet on GG 1944 - 45 western maps often are dominated by 109 K4s and FW's, why is that? Same goes for Pacific late. Then it should be like 28 red and 5 blue or something dont you agree?

If ppl wants to use the "its war" argument, at least lets be consequent.

JG54_Arnie
06-03-2005, 03:09 AM
good post Olli! http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/25.gif

Actually, what is needed would be a function where you can set the settings for an autoteam function. It doesnt have to be one setting where there's no room for a difference in numbers. If you want to build realistic environments it would aid in setting a difference between teams but on realistic terms.
But something has to be changed and the hosts need an option to set a maximum number of pilots per team, or per base even. Making it possible to limit planetypes and allowing for a lot more interesting scenarios.

People who only want to fly one plane and dont care what happens with the balance are the ones that are selfish. If you find yourself a good online pilot and you want to show it, then fly different planes and develop yourself. There's a lot of fun to be had in flying different sides and planes. If you get pissed off when people tell you how to fly, go fly somewhere else. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif If you join a server you will have enjoy the fact that its there and play by its rules.

whiteladder
06-03-2005, 03:22 AM
I think auto balance is a fairly unwieldy hammer to crack this nut. Forcing people to flying sides they have no wish to fly doesn`t seemlike a way to encourage people to frequent a server.

I think mission design is a much simpler and subtle solution. If a mission frequently has a bias, change the mission to give the other side an advantage.

I like the way that Chad has solved the problem over at Zeke v Wildcats, the Kokoda trail being a good example.

This map usually has a allied bias, so the Allied airfield is 5 minute flight from the main objective where as the Axis is 10 minutes (approx). This allows the Axis to have an advantage that evens out the pilot numbers.

To many missions are design to be completely even, and hope that human nature will do the rest to keep the sides even. We all know this isn`t the case.

My thoughts

dazza9806482
06-03-2005, 03:25 AM
Actually Arnie Im sure ive been on some servers that do manage to limit the maximum players per base. I think i played a map with the me163 involved and only 2 players could select that base and fly the plane

that might be an idea, not sure how to do it tho....

JG54_Arnie
06-03-2005, 03:44 AM
Yeah, its something to do with the spawnarea, making the circle of a homebase smaller so that fewer planes can actually spawn. From what I've seen this is a very rough solution and not at all clear. I've seen cases where people did spawn, but at a spawnpoint with obstacle, thus exploding on spawn and there's the message "waiting for confirmation of homebase" or something. Weird stuff. http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif We need a clear option for this, that also gives proper feedback to the user.

F19_Ob
06-03-2005, 04:37 AM
Hello lads.

I perhaps have expressed my opinions enough in this matter during the years already, but it's one of the few things in this community I really dislike. I force myself to blame some of the unsportiveness on evolutionary mechanisms.
( a "group of primates beats life out of a single intruder, no quarter given" type of thing)

My sad conclusion though is that it's simply a fact that for many it's much more important to fly on a particular side or to win instead of equality and an "anyone can win" situation.
I guess the main irritance for me is the lack of respect for the fellow simmer, who loves the hell out of this game (same as U).

I like to see it as we were fellow sportsmen in a competition. The teams should be equal. Imagine a football game (or any other competition) where one side have only half the players on the other side. Sux bigtime in my book.
This one thing is, as I see it, a very bad platform for camraderie and it sometimes gets evident on these boards aswell.

--------------------------------

http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif Dont get me wrong, I really like to be on the disadvantage wich forces me to enhance my tactical knowledge.
I and many of my mates are experienced enough to do well in crappy rides where we must rely on eachother just to stay alive.
On most occasions my fellow mates in the F19 squad immediatly split our group if the teams are uneven. Thats why I love those guys.
Some squads dont do this.
Ofcourse there are still many decent players out there and they're the ones making me stay with this game a while longer.


----------------------------------------

People seemingly have very different ideas of equality.
Some mean that 10 gladiators against 10 bf109's is equal although it's easy to find the flaw in this idea.
Anyway, for me 10 versus 10 would be ideal even if I were in the gladiator because that beats the odds I usually have battled in.
18 against 8 shouldn't be normal for anyone but alas.

I guess this is the reason why I always try to "persuade" the experts in super-rides to convert to crappy-rides once in a while, wich would be a nice gesture I think.

well, there it is.

dazza9806482
06-03-2005, 04:54 AM
Excellent post Ob

glad to see a lot of people think the same.

so actually back to my first question- are there any full switch historical servers where this isnt a problem?

or should i start playing coops?

thanks http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_smile.gif

WOLFMondo
06-03-2005, 05:03 AM
A good team balance option comes with the BFRM/BFSM for BF1942. The autobalance can be set to kick in if a preset no of people stack one team i.e. if its set to 3 then the teams can be stacked one way or another by 2 people. When there is 3 people more on one team than the other autobalance kicks in a the next person to die is autoswitched to the next team or the next person to join the server cannot select anything other than the under dog team


Originally posted by dazza9806482:
Hi guys

Gripe time. Greatergreen is a brilliant server one of many. Yet my last few games have been ruined by a staggering and ridiculous Luft advantage.

WC has been like that the last few times I've been on. Some guys simply will not fly any other plane than the one they always fly and will even further stack the teams with complete disregard to do this. I think they assume more conciencious people will even the teams out so they don't have too http://forums.ubi.com/images/smilies/16x16_smiley-sad.gif

c'mon people, bite the bullet, even the teams up, try some other planes out, who knows you might find one you likehttp://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif


Originally posted by HorribleSailor:

Allies v Germans = red advantage or even, again patriotism, but less so than the hatred of the Japanese?


Some are allot different. WC tends to be stacked with the blues more than reds.

csThor
06-03-2005, 05:26 AM
Just a little remark:

People fly this game for various reasons. Some may see an Online Dogfight as a simple Team vs. Team Match with historical planes - those are what I call the "sport fans". For them teams have to be even and they don't care which plane they're flying.

Then there are what I call the "roleplayers", those who choose one side/plane/historical unit and try to relive the life of a pilot as far as we can do that. They've chosen a plane/side and stick to it no matter what the odds are.

I am one of the latter category and outside offline quick dogfights (when I'm bored) or way back - when I was still flying Online - I have never flown Allied planes outside of squad training. So I'm saying "If you want even teams go play football or some other team sport." I don't see Online Dogfights as such "e-sports".

dazza9806482
06-03-2005, 06:00 AM
But its not just that the teams need to be even for 'sport' but also to try to replicate a military engagement within the game...


granted military engagements wherent even, but the persuit of objectives was prevalent and this is what scripted DF servers seek to recreate on a small scale.

however one b25 against 14 BF109'S isnt really a valid or fun scenario


i do understand what you saying but it then means map makers are rather wasting their time making interesting maps with mission objectives

MEGILE
06-03-2005, 06:07 AM
In my previous life I was Pierre closterman. I only fly Tempests online, and never will I fly for the luftwaffles!

In other words, if you don't even the teams when one side is heavily outnumbered, you are lame. You can take that to the bank!

WOLFMondo
06-03-2005, 06:09 AM
Currently flying allot of M$CFS3 then Megile? :P

MEGILE
06-03-2005, 06:11 AM
http://forums.ubi.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I am planning on purchasing CFS3 so I can fly the Mossie and Tesmpest.