Background Image

Wait for full connections

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Unahim, May 14, 2017.

  1. Unahim Unahim Curator

    Something has to change about how the game handles evening teams.

    Right now, it seems matches don't look for new people on the side with more players until things even out a bit. This is good. What isn't good, however, is that the system does not wait until people on the minority side have fully loaded in to start looking. No, instead, it starts connecting new people to the bigger side as soon as the smaller side starts connecting enough people to fix the previous imbalance.

    What this means is that the imbalance just perpetuates. We are down 3 people. Oh! Three new ones start to connect, yay, even teams. Ah, but now the other side is also connecting 3 new people while ours aren't loaded in yet... yay? If one of those people who was going to connect on the smaller side then fails to do so, or they load slower, the gap just gets bigger!

    This way, differences between sides often perpetuate for the entire "early game" of a match, lending critical mass to the bigger side. If this allows them to just sweep 2-3 control points, the battle is, in essence, over.

    I would go even further and say that no battle should begin until both sides are equal. We always even them out in the end, why not wait an extra minute to get a fair, fun fight rather than a one-sided stomp? If I get crushed due to outnumbering two times in a row, I pretty much feel all desire to play this game flee me. This is a big issue, you're losing players over this. Do something.
    Utherix, Xi0, spunkymonkeySK and 3 others like this.
  2. ^^ this.
    Too many games have grossly imbalanced player counts for the first 5 minutes. 15v20 for 5 minutes is a huge advantage compared to 20v20 in a game like this.
  3. Game started 7vs17. Thats how LSM win. And thats why i wish noone to play against them in during week.
    [​IMG]

    Attached Files:

  4. Kyros Drakonite Preacher

    I've said it before and I'll say it again:

    The 3-player gap needs to go.

    Until that happens, fights will continue to be decided by the MM, and not due to players skill. I can't begin to comprehend what went through their minds when they allowed the 3-player gap to begin with. How to (And why is it good to) have fair matches have been figured out since the 90's.
  5. In post above there is also 10 players gap. I cant comprehend any uneven balance between team numbers at all. That problem had been smoothed with f2p but now when f2p obviously failed we back to shit before. Less popular factions is outnumbered constantly. 3 players usual gap. Farcing people to leave the game at all. By judging of steamcharts before f2p was 200-1000 players daily. Now its usually 400-1500. Not a big difference.
  6. Drake De Molina Drake_De_Molina Steam Early Access

    The game can launch at 3 players gap. But if "waiting for players" is too long, the match force start whatever is the number.
    I once was 1v7 on a fortress map. Nice...
  7. Kyros Drakonite Preacher

    It doesn't start after a certain time, it's just the warparty system, combined with the current go-while-loading system screwing people as usual.

    Say you are 1 vs 7, and a 5-man Warparty just finished a game. They get automatically added to yours. But any big warparty will likely have to do things between matches, so they cancel queue. However, since the match had, for the briefest of moments a 6 vs 7, it decides "Hey, match is Fair! let's go".

    What is funnier is that since you had "6" players for a milisecond, it updates the "allowed" enemies to fill up to the 3-player gap again on that instant, so the match actually starts 1 vs 9.

    And that my friends is why the entire system is bonkers.
    Forj and spunkymonkeySK like this.
  8. Kurze spunkymonkeySK Subordinate

    downloadfile-13.jpg

    Game already started at this point..

    LSM rushed B with full team at start taking full advantage of imbalance.

    Shame for them they got wrecked when we evened the teams.

    EDIT and LSM think that people are not playing to stop them winning; it's the shit shown here that is causing people to avoid playing during this campaign
    Faeruin likes this.
  9. Unahim Unahim Curator

    It's a shame that this topic isn't controversial enough to actually generate posts, but I think it's pretty clear something needs to be done here. Pretty much every shooter of any size has auto-balance mechanics in place. The only thing EC can do is control how many people it starts the round with, so it should at least do that really, really well.
    Unfortunately and Drakonite like this.
  10. Utherix Utherix Firebrand

    YES. I also need to point out the irony that the game is designed in such a way that being vastly outnumbered for even a minute will cost you the entire match even if 90% of the match is played with even teams. This is because of one mechanic: capturing a point gives you way more time.

    A clever person would either eliminate this issue by forcing matches to start and maintain a fair ratio (no more than 10% numbers advantage), or mitigate it by giving attackers more time at the start and only a minute or so for capturing a picture point. Alternatively, the time given to attackers could be dynamically scaled down if the defending team has less players (and scaled up if they have more).

Share This Page