[Megathread] Team Balance Feedback/Discussion
I thought I'd try something different and (hopefully) start a consolidated post where players can discuss their thoughts and opinions on BFV's current balancing issues. Do you have any suggestions o...
Forum Discussion
As I have written in another thread previously:
"
1. BALANCING
Again and again it happens that teams only grow unilaterally. Even a team that is understaffed before the start of the game will not get any new players, but the opposing side, which is already over-represented, will. The balancing needs to be refined urgently. Possibly through autobalancing right at the start of the round.
2. HIGH PING
Some users play with a connection that is too slow, which completely breaks the gameplay. Therefore you should integrate an average ping monitoring. If a player with a high ping wants to join a game, a warning message should appear, which on the one hand indicates the connection problems and on the other hand warns that you can fly from the server for this.
My experience shows that a ping over 150 can significantly reduce the flow of play for all players. Especially when the ping is massive over 150 or the high pingers are piling up. That's why I find a kick with a message from an average ping of 150 ms over a period of three minutes to be appropriate and fair.
"
So I would say Autobalance at the start of a match would make sense.
And Squads should organize them in the match, not before the match. So you don't get suddenly +4 players (or even worse) on the enemies team.
In regards to unilateral balancing, the game does take a player's 'skill level' into account. Personally I hate this method because there are just too many factors that go into calculating skill, most of which mean nothing.
A player can sit in a tank for weeks and have over 3000 vehicle skill, but 0 soldier skill and the game will still think of them as a prized player on a map that doesn't even have vehicles for example.
150+ ping has always been a problem in the Battlefield franchise. It affects both sides though so I don't think we should be that fast to boot someone. Some people can afford better connections, some can't, and some people love to intentionally troll people - there has to be a happy medium that doesn't involve booting people though.
For example, I always join my European friends in events both for fun and in a competitive nature; even Friday Night Battlefield has people join together from all over. I'm no technical genius but there has to be a way servers and/or hit reg can be better for 150-180ping players... there's just gotta be.
- @TTZ_Dipsy Perfect is the enemy of the good, and there is an EASILY observable correlation in the vast majority of cases with XP total and lopsided teams. Just look at all game finishes with a margin of 300 or greater and total the XP on each side. I don't have to make this case subjectively- the data is all there.
Domination and SQTDM can turn sour extremely quick but more often than not this is because one team tries to play it way too cool and defensively. It's not impossible to turn a game around once you lose all your flags but still pretty difficult.
Doesn't necessarily mean the teams were unbalanced, it's just bad luck or bad strategy for one team. With so many different factors used to calculate an unrealistic "skill" level, it doesn't surprise me the algorithm can mess up. My hope is better matchmaking tools get released that fill current 1-5 open space matches instead of creating new lobbies for ~15 people
