Team balance, easy fix
I have been saying this for a while now. I think the game has excellent weapon balance, vehicles are ok (tanks and AA a bit OP) but the main issue is still TEAM balance. We all know what I'm talking...
Forum Discussion
@TTZ_Dipsy Good news, let's hope it's true.
Meanwhile another match where apparently rank "didn't matter"
We barely lost any tickets... wtff
Here is an explanation why high-ranked players matter more than you would think:
Let's suppose we have a team with 3 players at level 150 and everyone else is below. These 3 people can easily kill anyone below level 100 so they keep piling up big kill streaks.
Now let's assume the enemy team is lucky enough to have a level 300 player to join them. He will not only have big kill streaks but due to his finess and experience will counter the level 150 players on a regular basis and defend their own players from dieing. It's like having and Ace in your deck of cards.
This is why the strongest players determine the OUTCOME of the match most of the time.
Is this always true? Of course not. But very often I find my worst opponents to be the best players in the enemy team and if it wasn't for them, some of my killstreaks would count a lot more victims.
So an advanced matching system would have to balance the top 20% of players with bigger weights. (On a 32 vs 32 map you would have to accurately match the top 6 / 6 players as they ultimately who set the balance in the game)
- @GUTENTAAAAG lets say for instance you're the on the dominating team and 3 or 4 games in a row with say 5 of your mates you're destroying and winning every game. Then 1 or 2 people join, land on the enemy team and simply thrash everyone including your squad over and over again.
Now say you and your team were all going negative, would you consider it fair to have those 2 players automatically switched over when you're team had the majority of high end players?
This is where automatic team balance will have problems, the 5 of you might have an average K/D of say 5 and the 2 players on the enemy team might have a joint average K/D of 3.5 the computer should statistically see you as having the higher numbers and better average but that might not be what's happening in game.
So how would you compensate for that?@Real_Noobalishus if you had a proper balancing system in the first place you could not have a squad of 5 high ranked players matched against complete noobs.
Well, I never proposed comparing K/D of players or squads just only rank. If your are high ranked, you have played the game more and have more idea how to contribute to your team even if your K/D is not super high. Also you could be a low ranked tank wh0re with high K/D and have no clue about infantry play. As I said matching by rank is not super accurate but the goal is not to make every game a draw but to have better teambalance than we have now. This would be the first step, the rest will be fine tuning.
Here is a good example what I was talking about in the previous post:
As you can see the highest ranking players piling up most kills and one team having more of the high ranked players results in a COMPLETE imbalance of the teams.
This is far too common not to notice. Unless you are testing in a closed studio with the same people / relatively similar skill level.
Btw this was the first server I joined today and just by looking at the scoreboard you could tell: it's not worth playing this match because the outcome is already sealed.
Since teambalance is mostly dependent on the rank of the best players in a team here is how I would apply the rule:
Add rank of top 6 players in a team and match it as accurately as possible to the opposing team's same number.
Do the same for the next 6 players with a bit more room for mismatch.
The bottom 20 players can be selected randomly.
With this method teams would be balanced and diverse at the same time.
