A wandering Wizard happening by decided to read the OP's post .
"I feel this part is rather alarming" he said :
. . 'I don't wanna get better'. .
In a simple-for-him-solution , a wave of his hand and , Poof!
OP was off into just such a world , surrounded only by 'sameness' just like them .
Where one day ONE of them said 'I WANT to get better' .
. . . at which point the wise Wizard says , "I'm outta here"
hmm there was a "try" in December '20.. we had a team shuffle after each round.. the result was nice - we had much more intense games.. the only negative points were.. we attacked or defended multiple maps in a row.
And if we ran with more then one squad it was a lil bit annoying 'cause one squad had to rejoin on map change 'cause they often ended up on a different server..
Sadly too many people complained and the team shuffle was turned off.. I'd like to link the forum thread.. but it's on the old/offline forum..
The problem with the battlefield V shuffle was it kicked people from servers to fresh ones so you had to wait for it to fill which sounded frustrating and disjointed.
I liked the battlefield 1 team shuffle that was something like first squad against second and then randomise the rest. People play with personality and have a routine so they tend to play the same way every time so shuffling is definitely needed to not get bored and first squad against second from any round is normally enough to put the game in a position where you can play without being insta killed or perma spawn trapped.
I don't expect micromanagement of the game to make it as balanced as possible like changing of teams post round start or using overall stats, just the one's from the previous round. I also don't like people team switching, it leads to a game of chicken where people are trying to second guess the person or squad dictating who wins and switch to that side and then no1's playing coz they're too busy team switching. Also having the game in a position where a squad can dictate gameplay shows bad balance in the first place.
I am expecting teams to fill up fairly evenly though and have max players per side for the most part, BFV was very bad at that.
Also in breakthrough it's best to go defend then attack then shuffle teams, and in grand ops it's best to do the 3 days then shuffle rather than after each round.
@wildbam wrote:hmm there was a "try" in December '20.. we had a team shuffle after each round.. the result was nice - we had much more intense games.. the only negative points were.. we attacked or defended multiple maps in a row.
And if we ran with more then one squad it was a lil bit annoying 'cause one squad had to rejoin on map change 'cause they often ended up on a different server..
Sadly too many people complained and the team shuffle was turned off.. I'd like to link the forum thread.. but it's on the old/offline forum..
Too many of of the middling players know just enough to kill the balance these days unfortunately. BF1 was plagued with opportunistic team switching caused by Operations that had a false reputation for being impossible on one side or the other. That soon became a self fulfilling prophecy. BFV had chunks of teams quickly quitting at the sight of clan tags on the opposition team, not without reason either. Air power killing everyone on the flag seems like much more of a thing in BF1 and BFV than it was before then as well, but that could be my memory playing tricks.
People playing the series for a long time and making the effort to watch the youtubers for tips versus a lot of casual players who often seem to be playing another game entirely makes for a very hard game to balance.
@bigiainBut being casual does not excuse their disinterest in trying to assist the team.
Just doing basic things like healing, reviving, giving ammo, repairing, spotting and reacting and using counters on threats like vehicles, make a huge difference even if one is mediocre to bad at gunfights
