60 replies to this topic

[HellRik]

Pap, on November 25 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

@HellRik
i dont think you should feel "endangered" what you are saying is absolutely true. if the game wants to launch that soon (even if only open beta) they don't have much time for polishing everything.
server lists are disabled for this beta and this one of the main complaints from everyone:) meteor wants to test their matchmaking. but as i said many times before:
IMHO there is not time and point in testing and trying to create a working match making system.there are so many bugs in the game that devs should focus on them and just go with the autobalancing system and servers browser

Understood.

Also. For anyone who reads this. Beeing part of a good community and beeing a good player starts by NOT GIVING A FRACK to be auto-balanced onto the bad ( low ) team. Getting punished because you are good no. Grow up and get some balls. geez Thats call good sportmanship.

If I hurts anyone's feeling then I must be telling the truth. What is fun into ownage when the game goes 6vs2 after 2 mins_ You love the unbalance_ You like playing w/o challenge_ Then I must say you have to compensate for having such a small e-peen.

Plz METEOR get the auto-balance switch on! Get the last to click Ready in lobby to the the 1st to be switch. Thats might push poeple the ready the frack up faster too

WHat I'd like is an plain and simple answer from a dev on that matter or a link to another thread where they answered this.

Edited by HellRik, November 25 2012 - 09:30 AM.

[DarkPulse]

Pap, on November 25 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

how MANY online titles have you played with this kind of autobalance system (where teams are getting evenly distributed)_
i play in this kind of system for a VERY LONG time in a community much bigger and older than hawken. and NOBODY whines about it. it makes the game competetive and interesting. if a good player is switched to the loosing team (when they are heavily outnumbered) he should just show how much skills he has and tear his former team.

argument that 'people will quit because they dont want to be in a loosing team' is BS. if you are the best in the match then it doesn't matter. you only get a very VERY little more xp/money when you finish in the winning team

Several. People do not want to be punished for doing good, and Autobalance systems, in most cases, tend to shift the good players over. They are then sunk with a team that is not as skilled. Now, if it's only a little discrepancy, that's fine; they might play on. But if it was something like a 1.5:1 ratio, odds are they'll just quit too. It's simply no fun when the game autobalances you, and people don't want to take the loss. It'd be a lot better if it tried to balance by the XP of the guy who just left (moving over the person closest to him in XP at the switch point) but oftentimes it just targets the players in the lead on the other side.

See, for all the theoretical talk of 6v2, usually people will switch if you ask nicely and it's not too late in the match. If people don't switch, then usually I switch or I leave too, as after all, nobody is forced to stay. The problem is that can keep tripping Autobalance and eventually depopulate the server... all because one or two guys left. Unfortunately, people have egos.

It also makes clans almost impossible to play as a unified team unless the feature is disabled on the server. Considering the devs have plans for Hawken as an eSport, I think it's safe to say that players will at least want the option, and most serious players would probably prefer that it default to off.

Edited by DarkPulse, November 25 2012 - 01:19 PM.

[Pap]

NO ONE SWITCHED EVER in a hawken game when we had this kind of uneven teams. as far as i remember only i switch teams when they are uneven:) and this kind of logic is just wrong. you expect people to be 'nice' and switch just when you asked them_ even if they would just consider this:
1. you have to stop playing to write this down to someone
2. that someon has to SEE your message while he is playing and in the heat of the game it's very hard to be talkative (you cant use open voice chat)

just like HellRik said,
if someone is whining that he got switched to a loosing team with fewer plays. that user got no balls or doesn't know what is a good game or 'sportsmanship'
i guess those are just kids that write GG with a smiley face when they just won a match being in a 6 mechs games in 6vs2 game..(and i see this kind of shiet all the time)

you talk about clans in a beta that doesn't even have partying system.. COME ON DUDE__!! what problem is that. if the devs want clans for play there would be special servers/games when autobalance is off what problem is there_ they should work on the autobalance now in the bet to get it right for the open beta for EVERYONE to get some fun. not just douchebags that doesn't want to switch

[DarkPulse]

Pap, on November 25 2012 - 01:29 PM, said:

NO ONE SWITCHED EVER in a hawken game when we had this kind of uneven teams. as far as i remember only i switch teams when they are uneven:) and this kind of logic is just wrong. you expect people to be 'nice' and switch just when you asked them_ even if they would just consider this:
1. you have to stop playing to write this down to someone
2. that someon has to SEE your message while he is playing and in the heat of the game it's very hard to be talkative (you cant use open voice chat)

just like HellRik said,
if someone is whining that he got switched to a loosing team with fewer plays. that user got no balls or doesn't know what is a good game or 'sportsmanship'
i guess those are just kids that write GG with a smiley face when they just won a match being in a 6 mechs games in 6vs2 game..(and i see this kind of shiet all the time)

you talk about clans in a beta that doesn't even have partying system.. COME ON DUDE__!! what problem is that. if the devs want clans for play there would be special servers/games when autobalance is off what problem is there_ they should work on the autobalance now in the bet to get it right for the open beta for EVERYONE to get some fun. not just douchebags that doesn't want to switch

I had several matches today where someone switched on asking. I had a few that didn't, though. Regardless, people who are getting stomped and don't want to play anymore should simply leave; eventually enough people leave that the winners don't have anyone to shoot anymore.

While it's true that someone does have to see it, the chatbox does appear with each spawn (unless minimized). I like nothing more than games balanced as possible, but the simple fact of the matter is that most autobalance systems are very blind and stupid. They don't switch players who are of similar skill to the one who left - they often switch the better players. This guy now has to "make up" for the difference in frags if he can, but sometimes, it's impossible.

What do they do then_ They leave.

Autobalance is full of good intentions but bad implementations, it's that simple. It may solve the 6v2 stomp problem, but then it creates problems of its own, of people who will not want to be switched and forced to take a loss, so they bail. This won't solve the fundamental problem of player skill causing the stomp, and it will always leave the inferior team a man down.

[Bisonator]

Mtachmaking in closed beta 2 seemed fine, lots of full servers, can't we just have it back like that until they get a new system that will actually work_

[Pap]

DarkPulse, on November 25 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

... Regardless, people who are getting stomped and don't want to play anymore should simply leave; eventually enough people leave that the winners don't have anyone to shoot anymore.

i don't think it's an option developers are counting on don't you think:)_

DarkPulse, on November 25 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

While it's true that someone does have to see it, the chatbox does appear with each spawn (unless minimized).

you just crossed this option out yourself:)

DarkPulse, on November 25 2012 - 02:23 PM, said:

This guy now has to "make up" for the difference in frags if he can, but sometimes, it's impossible.
What do they do then_ They leave.

so_ if he can't manage it so what, tell me_ i just simply don't understand what the fuss about switching good players is. if meteor/adhesive is counting on stereotypical 14yo cod-like players then you are right, but i dont think its the direction they are aiming for

i'm sorry. i'm not trying to be rude or trolling (don't get me wrong) i just simply can't comprehend your way of thinking about autobalance. you make it sound like it's impossible to make a good autobalance, but it is, much simpler games have that in and working fine.what is even more funny many games just have it on the server side (developed by players, not the developers)
1. you say that clans would be broken_ SOLUTION: make servers where autobalance is off, even better: make servers for clan fights. ive been in some clans in some games and in normal games we didnt mind playing againts our bretheren its JUST a game not a real war
2. you say that autobalance wont secure the skill problem_ why not_ SOLUTION: if you don't want to rely on simple even-odd team numbers, servers can calculate which player is the most valuable, got most kills, most energy collected/delivered, got most 'defends/ captures' etc.  to make it even simpler: servers don't have to calculate this (no complicated coding needed cause the game has everything build in. you get xp for certain actions like defending, capturing conquesting energy collection or simple kills and you get info how many times you have completed this things.
E.G. in a siege mode we get uneven teams, fewer mechs team is good on collecting but lacks any 'killer' simple move the most kills from the opposing team to this team. I DONT SEE ANY PROBLEM IN THIS KIND OF IMPLEMENTATION its not hard.

of course i would propose a hardcore version of autobalance system that would shuffle the players even if the teams are even. it could be an option for some servers. but it would be a hell lot of fun. if you consider yourself a really good player you would find it to be a realy good challange when you are constalty getting switched when you rock both teams. it makes the game more interesting for the best players (if they are really the best, not those that just 'claim' they are good)

[Spiderz]

SamSlade, on November 23 2012 - 08:36 PM, said:

Karaipantsu, on November 23 2012 - 06:56 AM, said:

You also have to remember that this is a CLOSED beta,

Eh.. someone drank the koolaid... check your marketing 101 books... that little 'days until launch counter' in the top left suggests that there was never any real expectation of change as a result of player feedback.  The 'surprise it's servers everywhre' patch suggests the same thing.  They're telling you a story of little devs lost in a big wide world and making it big to suck you along on the journey with them(possibly because they didn't have a game-story to begin with).

Go back over the timeline... first they're an indie developer(because it's 'cool') but they show up at the major games expos with a budget that's bigger then Ben Hur_  They ambush us with a joystick console being designed for Hawken_  People start to get suspicious so all of a sudden they have 18 million that wasn't there from the outset... this whole thing has been a very clever marketing buildup to a pre-christmas release that's going to go toe to toe wiith the next CoD release... I'll bet we get console compatibility as the big Open Beta surprise.

Then look at the gameplay... starts at a high risk zero sum game with a nasty skill cap... slowly we're going down the yellow brick road of WoT/WoW acceptable power creep grind.

It's so obvious... these Beta tests are data mineing to findout what sells and to test the servers... don't expect any real feedback changes that weren't a set up(i.e.: make Rocketeer stupidly OP, give it away for free... nerfbat it and everyones happy with Devs listening to player feedback... come on, seriously_).

lol samslade.

[HellRik]

Why think of auto balance as an inconveinience_
If you are so whilling to keep a good win/loss ratio..well just dont play.

I ALWAYS switch when its unbalance for 2 reasons. I am a good player ( skills aside ) and also I hate looking for poeple on a empty map because we all endup running in circles one after another instead of clashing into a battlefront. THe worse case I've seen so far was 6 mechs stomping 2 poor mechs in the spawn over and over. You Wonder why no one is playing Seige and Missle assault_

When poeple talk about auto-balance they only bring up the negative sides for their personal play and experience. They never talk about the greater picture. The overall picture....not the hole aspect of it. I still have a positive K/D ratio even after playing 5 days with constant manual switchs. Who cares about W/L ratio yet_ Population is so low and they will reset mech anyway.

Autobalance will reward EVENRYONE by switching equally and neutrally w/e the ratio win/lose situation games.

Unfortunatly, there is NO PERFECT solution, just a balanced solution, and auto-balance removes all feeling/side taking from the equation.

I've played long enough in so many FPS games that I know there is no GOOD solution..just a balanced one.

Let see who wants it :
http://community.pla...1-auto-balance/

Edited by HellRik, November 25 2012 - 03:31 PM.

[SamSlade]

Spiderz, on November 25 2012 - 02:54 PM, said:

lol samslade.

the whole 'being facetious' thing didn't go over too well...

[ReachH]

Well to be fair, this is probably only a CB issue. Limited player pool, specific match-making testing etc.

[Beemann]

HellRik, on November 25 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

Why think of auto balance as an inconveinience_
If you are so whilling to keep a good win/loss ratio..well just dont play.

Imagine, if you will, a match that was very VERY close, but ultimately your team broke through and are going to win
Several people on the other team ragequit
With the current system, you just steamroll through and win. The people on the losing team get a properly balanced team for the next round, and you get your win
With autobalance, you get put on the losing side
Again
And again
And again

Not to mention the fact that normally the losing team (even if it gains enough players to make the match even) often has a stream of leavers. Rarely do I see a match just magically turn into a 6v2 and stay there for the remainder of the match
People come and go, raging out in a torrent of untyped curses and exploded mechs.

It trivializes the work you put into the game, and it forces you to try to carry a losing team because some people on that end were jerks and left.
It's just not a fun mechanic at all
It's fine to switch when the match could still go either way, but at that point where everyone knows what team is going to win, there's no point. There's no sense in getting forced into a losing side when it would be much simpler to just end the match right then and there
Especially when you get into longer gamemodes, like Siege (even Missile Assault can get pretty lengthy)

Why not just add a surrender vote instead_ Works for SMNC, League, Dota2, Smite, etc, ideal for longer gamemodes, doesn't fuzzy bunny over people who worked hard to win
AND once the match ends, you can have everyone scrambled/balanced out for the next match

Edited by Beemann, November 26 2012 - 03:42 AM.

[defekt]

Beemann, on November 26 2012 - 03:40 AM, said:

HellRik, on November 25 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

Why think of auto balance as an inconveinience_
If you are so whilling to keep a good win/loss ratio..well just dont play.

Imagine, if you will, a match that was very VERY close, but ultimately your team broke through and are going to win
Several people on the other team ragequit
With the current system, you just steamroll through and win. The people on the losing team get a properly balanced team for the next round, and you get your win
With autobalance, you get put on the losing side
Again
And again
And again

Not to mention the fact that normally the losing team (even if it gains enough players to make the match even) often has a stream of leavers. Rarely do I see a match just magically turn into a 6v2 and stay there for the remainder of the match
People come and go, raging out in a torrent of untyped curses and exploded mechs.

It trivializes the work you put into the game, and it forces you to try to carry a losing team because some people on that end were jerks and left.
It's just not a fun mechanic at all
It's fine to switch when the match could still go either way, but at that point where everyone knows what team is going to win, there's no point. There's no sense in getting forced into a losing side when it would be much simpler to just end the match right then and there
Especially when you get into longer gamemodes, like Siege (even Missile Assault can get pretty lengthy)

Why not just add a surrender vote instead_ Works for SMNC, League, Dota2, Smite, etc, ideal for longer gamemodes, doesn't fuzzy bunny over people who worked hard to win
AND once the match ends, you can have everyone scrambled/balanced out for the next match

Must admit, I would now prefer a Surrender option to mid-game auto-balancing.

[Raxaphan]

First, fun in a game it's different for each player: win, shot left and right, just chat, make fun of players, be a fuzzy bunny, ruin others games etc.
And the most important part is that in a game where you need to grind hard to level up, to be able to buy things no one likes to go to the loser team.
The only times when someone will switch are: the match will not end soon and the tables can be turn, the player does not care about progression and if in the losing team the player has some friends.
So forcing players is just making them quit.

Edited by Raxaphan, November 26 2012 - 04:45 AM.

[Pap]

Beemann, on November 26 2012 - 03:40 AM, said:

HellRik, on November 25 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

Why think of auto balance as an inconveinience_
If you are so whilling to keep a good win/loss ratio..well just dont play.

Imagine, if you will, a match that was very VERY close, but ultimately your team broke through and are going to win
Several people on the other team ragequit
With the current system, you just steamroll through and win. The people on the losing team get a properly balanced team for the next round, and you get your win
With autobalance, you get put on the losing side
Again
And again
And again

Not to mention the fact that normally the losing team (even if it gains enough players to make the match even) often has a stream of leavers. Rarely do I see a match just magically turn into a 6v2 and stay there for the remainder of the match
People come and go, raging out in a torrent of untyped curses and exploded mechs.

It trivializes the work you put into the game, and it forces you to try to carry a losing team because some people on that end were jerks and left.
It's just not a fun mechanic at all
It's fine to switch when the match could still go either way, but at that point where everyone knows what team is going to win, there's no point. There's no sense in getting forced into a losing side when it would be much simpler to just end the match right then and there
Especially when you get into longer gamemodes, like Siege (even Missile Assault can get pretty lengthy)

Why not just add a surrender vote instead_ Works for SMNC, League, Dota2, Smite, etc, ideal for longer gamemodes, doesn't fuzzy bunny over people who worked hard to win
AND once the match ends, you can have everyone scrambled/balanced out for the next match

why making another problem here_just make the game not AUTOBALANCE RIGHT AWAY make a 10-20seconds timer. i thought that was already set in your mind:) of course the game should not switch the players with crazy ass speed.

also there is a problem now with game starting only with 3 players.. WTF _! how the games can even start balanced where it is possible to begin with 1vs2. that is a HUGEEEEEE mistake from the devs

[HellRik]

Beemann, on November 26 2012 - 03:40 AM, said:

HellRik, on November 25 2012 - 03:17 PM, said:

Why think of auto balance as an inconveinience_
If you are so whilling to keep a good win/loss ratio..well just dont play.

Imagine, if you will, a match that was very VERY close, but ultimately your team broke through and are going to win
Several people on the other team ragequit
With the current system, you just steamroll through and win. The people on the losing team get a properly balanced team for the next round, and you get your win
With autobalance, you get put on the losing side
Again
And again
And again

Not to mention the fact that normally the losing team (even if it gains enough players to make the match even) often has a stream of leavers. Rarely do I see a match just magically turn into a 6v2 and stay there for the remainder of the match
People come and go, raging out in a torrent of untyped curses and exploded mechs.

It trivializes the work you put into the game, and it forces you to try to carry a losing team because some people on that end were jerks and left.
It's just not a fun mechanic at all
It's fine to switch when the match could still go either way, but at that point where everyone knows what team is going to win, there's no point. There's no sense in getting forced into a losing side when it would be much simpler to just end the match right then and there
Especially when you get into longer gamemodes, like Siege (even Missile Assault can get pretty lengthy)

Why not just add a surrender vote instead_ Works for SMNC, League, Dota2, Smite, etc, ideal for longer gamemodes, doesn't fuzzy bunny over people who worked hard to win
AND once the match ends, you can have everyone scrambled/balanced out for the next match

Well I understand, but I forgot to mention that auto-balancing shoudl not occur more then 2 times per match. like at start and at the 5mins mark. Giving enough time to both sides to close any gap taken. Leave the rest to skills.

I've won 2vs3 games (siege and MS ) often to know that beeing switch as nothing to do with who's winning at the end.

As Pap mentionned ( that I also did in other threads and still no answers from Devs ), why the hec do you need 3/4 ready up to start a match__

Edited by HellRik, November 26 2012 - 06:14 AM.

[DarkPulse]

defekt, on November 26 2012 - 04:23 AM, said:

Must admit, I would now prefer a Surrender option to mid-game auto-balancing.

I would fully agree for a surrender option. If the game is a total wash and the team is convinced of it, they can vote to resign, match ends immediately, next match starts and teams get re-shuffled.

I don't mind losing, but I don't want to be constantly cycled onto the losing side because some other idiots didn't like that they were losing, and the game decides to yank me over there. If it happens, I will quit the match if it's obviously unwinnable, it's that simple. I don't like doing it, but I also should not be forced to eat a loss because I was kicking some other guys' butts.

[Pap]

we can talk all week about it but they need to autobalance the teams at least at the begining. what i noticed just more is that the new player is ALWAYS gettint in the LEFT team (prosk_) so even if we have swtiching in out players they always get in this one team which is bullshit

[HellRik]

I assume this will be fixed ( parts of it ) when the servers list choice will be back as players will definitly enter servers that are populated over empty ones.

[Pap]

somesaid it before (or i heared it in the game): i would rather wait to join in a maxed out server than waiting for an empty server to get populated:)

[HellRik]

Pap, on November 26 2012 - 02:10 PM, said:

somesaid it before (or i heared it in the game): i would rather wait to join in a maxed out server than waiting for an empty server to get populated:)

Thats simply common sense