Yeah, nice team balance btw.

  • Levels don't mean anything, in any game you'll see high level players who suck, and low level players who kick as.


    That being said, I think they should remove the party system because it leads to unfair matches like 3vs1 or something. That's what I call bad team balance...


    I know, some people like to play with their friends and I got nothing against that. So, instead of this party system, there should be a button in your friend list to follow/invite someone into his match (obviously, not necessarily on the same team, to keep things balanced). This way people can still play with their friends but have a fair game.

  • Levels don't mean anything, in any game you'll see high level players who suck, and low level players who kick as.


    That being said, I think they should remove the party system because it leads to unfair matches like 3vs1 or something. That's what I call bad team balance...


    I know, some people like to play with their friends and I got nothing against that. So, instead of this party system, there should be a button in your friend list to follow someone into his match (obviously, not necessarily on the same team, to keep things balanced). This way people can still play with their friends but have a fair game.

    Going to say nah to that idea. People want to hangout in discord and play together and have fun and not being able to group doesnt help. Even with out parties people will still get matches were they carry games and get 40-50 kills in TDM as a solo.


    I play with people I like in the game no matter their skill level, I care about their personality more and removing party system would be an awful idea.

  • Discord? What's that? :D


    What is really awful is a 6vs3 match caused by this party system.


    Sorry but looks like you didn't understand/read what I said: even without parties, you could still play with anyone you want by following/inviting them to a match. The only difference is that the number of players in each team would be balanced. Like I said, I don't care about level or skill either, all I'm saying is teams should be balanced when it comes to number of players. Parties don't need to be removed for that, but maybe just "broken" when needed to reach this balance.

  • Discord? What's that? :D


    What is really awful is a 6vs3 match caused by this party system.


    Sorry but looks like you didn't understand/read what I said: even without parties, you could still play with anyone you want by following/inviting them to a match. The only difference is that the number of players in each team would be balanced. Like I said, I don't care about level or skill either, all I'm saying is teams should be balanced when it comes to number of players. Parties don't need to be removed for that, but maybe just "broken" when needed to reach this balance.

    I read that idea but I think that's an awful idea, it would first require removing the party system and then on top of it you have to hope to play with your friends on the same team. A better fix would just have on their match making system have enough players for even players on both teams before creating the lobby. Why punish people who want to play on the same team when they can make sure lobby's have enough players first.

  • Splitting up teams that are on discord is going to lead to toxic behaviour like ghosting and throwing. I don't think it's a great idea.


    Better just to force groups to wait until there are enough players available on the other team to have a balanced match.

  • Splitting up teams that are on discord is going to lead to toxic behaviour like ghosting and throwing. I don't think it's a great idea.


    Better just to force groups to wait until there are enough players available on the other team to have a balanced match.

    There's absolutely no reason to use discord unless you're playing SnD (really helpful for this mode). I like your idea, that's a good fix, but some people will say "nah I don't wanna wait even more to start a match".

  • Splitting up teams that are on discord is going to lead to toxic behaviour like ghosting and throwing. I don't think it's a great idea.


    Better just to force groups to wait until there are enough players available on the other team to have a balanced match.

    There's absolutely no reason to use discord unless you're playing SnD (really helpful for this mode). I like your idea, that's a good fix, but some people will say "nah I don't wanna wait even more to start a match".

    Some people are casual gamers and use discord to talk for fun not just for competitive advantage. I know some parties are insanely strong but keep in mind most people who play this game are casuals. Removing the party system would ruin the fun of playing on the same team as your friends. Its much easier to queue in a party than trying to invite all your friends at the beginning of every match if your suggestions are implemented. I say we make the party system even bigger. Increase party limit from 5 man to 6 man (or woman). If the player base was larger than none of this would be an issue. Make some friends in game, its fun to party up!

  • no1 forced u to play with team, so i see nothin wrong on making people pay with more waiting time if they want advantage of playing as group of more experienced players vs teams usually half full of noobs

  • iLoveTeddies

    >then just match them up with high (Not the highest) ranked players and put them against eachother

    You can only do this after a timeout. The longer the timeout, the fairer the matches end up, but the longer queue times will take.

    With a small player base, the time you spend in queue is literally the main factor that determines fairness.


    >there could be a system implemented that takes the ranks of each player in the lobby and makes 2 teams with each team having the closest average rank as possible

    I suppose, yeah. I'm not convinced that this isn't already implemented because I don't share your experience that this is a common issue.

    Matches refilling more quickly could also make a small difference, there are many matches I play that end up in 3v3 quickly because people like Vodzigor straight up quit the match when they see my name, resulting in more imbalance.

    Also, as many explained before, rank should certainly not be the value to balance by.



    cristianomtd

    >That being said, I think they should remove the party system

    Oh jesus christ, this nonsense again. This is a bad idea as I explained to you in the other thread about this.


    >there should be a button in your friend list to follow/invite someone into his match

    Dirty Bomb had this and it was terrible because matches are created in a way where they are mostly full.

    You can't just invite people into the match afterwards, you'll just spend MINUTES waiting for someone to leave!

    This is a terrible suggestion with multiple examples that show that it's bad, please don't advertize your nonsense further.

    It may sound like a good idea to you, but it is definetly not.



    JNI

    >no1 forced u to play with team, so i see nothin wrong on making people pay with more waiting time if they want advantage of playing as group of more experienced players vs teams usually half full of noobs

    You don't realize that it will affect queue times of single players negatively as well and that queue times for groups might get magnitudes worse as a result of this.

    Do you want a dead game? Because making people who play in teams quit because of high queue times is how you get a dead game.



    To end this: Implementing fairer matchmaking can only be something that they choose to implement when the game is being released on steam because of the higher player count.

    Right now I think that the player count is too small, considering that I mostly play against the same people.

  • Tfw you want proper match making by maybe hidden mmr systems.. when the game barely has any players lol.

    Have fun waiting an hour for a match I guess?

    Please explain how a system that matches parties with other parties AND/OR higher ranked players will increase matchmaking times significantly? This game has more than enough players to do it. A team balance system that goes into play during the lobby won't even affect matchmaking times. Til that there are more matchmaking systems than mmr?


    lemme keep this short and sweet


    you will be waiting longer because of the small playerbase, the amount of people who roughly match your rank will be smaller vs the amount of people who vastly outrank you.


    As others also said it before me, r

    anks means just about nothing. You could have the highest level possible and still be pwned by someone of lesser rank whos playing smart. Right now, I think they have bigger issues to fix than unbalanced matchmaking.

  • Tfw you want proper match making by maybe hidden mmr systems.. when the game barely has any players lol.

    Have fun waiting an hour for a match I guess?

    Please explain how a system that matches parties with other parties AND/OR higher ranked players will increase matchmaking times significantly? This game has more than enough players to do it. A team balance system that goes into play during the lobby won't even affect matchmaking times. Til that there are more matchmaking systems than mmr?

    The game doesn't have more than enough players though... that's the entire point. The game is pretty dead rn.

  • The game doesn't have more than enough players though... that's the entire point. The game is pretty dead rn.

    Dead? It's not dead. It's in a state of permanent hybernation. Think of it like a coma, but there's no life support or doctors around. It looks dead, but poke it with a stick and something moves.

    *loads game to search for match*


    Nope, scratch that metaphor. It's dead

  • The only nonsense here is a team with more players than the other. No matter what you say, it's not fair and nothing justify this situation.


    What do you suggest to fix this problem, smart boy? Or you will tell me this isn't a real problem?


    If you start to think, you'll see the only thing parties do is leading to unfair matches, not only 'cos of player number but also pro squads vs random players. But yeah let's keep it that way, I really don't mind as far as I don't end up in a 5vs1 match, which is allowed by this wonderful system :D

  • Matches not filling up as quickly as they used to is the main reason why matches retain an imbalanced player count for so long, I believe. I don't think you have to break up parties to achieve player count balance, as long as you're willing to accept the chance of a short imbalance at the start, which I don't think is too bad.


    However, let's go down hypothesis-highway and assume that breaking up parties is actually necessary to attain playercount-balance.

    If your only goal is fairness, then yes, there's nothing to justify the situation.

    However, if you consider other factors, like queue times, many people wanting to play in parties, etc., you'll notice that changing up the system in the way you want will make a lot of players unhappy, namely those that aren't willing to sacrifice playing with their friends or short queue times in favor of fairness. OhEmGee decently explained what usually happens in that case.


    I don't think that waiting for the match to fill up fully would be that bad, actually, especially since almost all matches I play are full at the start (so I'm not even sure where your complaints stem from), but what about those moments where people quit the match and it takes a while for people to rejoin? Is that inherently undesirable as well? Do you think that we should punish people for leaving matches like in any of those super serious and toxic casual-comp FPS games where you need to commit to every single match just to play casually?


    Frankly, I personally don't care if I run into an unfair match every 2nd game, as long as I get to play with my friends and don't need to wait 5 minutes to find a match. I don't play this game to be competitive, which it doesn't have the capabilities for anyways, but to just jump in and frag a bunch of people.

    It's okay if you're willing to sacrifice everything else for fairness, but don't expect others to agree with your bullshit.


    Dirty Bomb had all those things you suggested, and people were constantly complaining, ghosting, throwing, waiting for matches to lose players so they could join - you name it. In fact, it didn't have a proper party system not because the devs removed it, but because they never implemented a proper one. So by analogy I assume that other people usually agree with my sentiment on this issue.

    Besides, you need to tackle much more to achieve real balance other than just the team player count - and the issues with attacking that have been explained explicitly in this thread.


    I'd usually go even further and suggest that I don't even want every match to be balanced, because that would mean that I would have to play seriously all the time to enjoy myself - and quite frankly that is not the reason why I play this game.

    However, because many people like yourself exist, who desperately look for reasons as to why they lost a match - their team, the other team, the game - anything that isn't themselves, balance is a desirable goal such that people like yourself don't get frustrated and quit the game, so the game retains more of its player base, and I accept that, but not under these conditions.


    EDIT: It's a possibility that even with a balanced game these types of complaints don't stop, they just change. Instead of complaining about imbalanced matches, these people end up complaining about how bad the teams in their respective skill ranking is (looking at league, for instance) - and the only thing that changes is that everyone needs to be sweaty at all times. Not so sure about this one, though.

    The post was edited 1 time, last by sqroot ().

  • An incredible demonstration of your reading comprehension skills.

    I suppose arguing with you is a waste of time, so I will cease to do it and hope that staff members reading this think about these issues for longer, in greater detail and have better reading comprehension than you do.

  • t's okay if you're willing to sacrifice everything else for fairness, but don't expect others to agree with your bullshit.

    So, wanting a fair game is bs? Ok then you win :D

    When you choose solo players, you alienate team players. When you choose team players, you alienate solo players. There is no win-win situation with this.

    This has been a problem in both Dirty Bomb and Ghost in the Shell First Assault, can't remember if it was a problem in Alliance of Valiant Arms and Blacklight Retribution though. I know how much it sucks to be pubstomped and I know how much it sucks not being able to play with your friends.

    When there aren't enough people playing this always happens, but both things will kill the game. Remaining like this will scare away solo players, changing it so people can't play in a team will scare away team players. I don't think there is any compromise situation that is good for both parties. The only thing that can be done is to ignore the problem and lose one group of players and hoping not all of them will be bothered by this.

    GITS:FA died because they chose team players over solo players. Dirty Bomb died, because they chose solo players over team players.


    This is the sad reality of the situation.