115 replies to this topic

[I_am_the_law]

Thank you.
Awesome.
Hope this does it.

[ReachH]

[font=comic sans ms,cursive]HALLELUJAH!![/font]

[HackNFly]

Quote

Currently when team imbalance is detected, the autobalance system will wait 30 seconds before taking any action.

The problem I've seen is that it simply doesn't detect the imbalance.  I've been in several games on both sides where the balance was 19/5 before it decided to switch a person, it simply doesn't balance things very well to begin with. Glad the issue is being tackled though.

The teamswitch button will fix it, however I think you should give the players more freedom to switch, not just what the autobalancer decides, let anyone switch from the winning to losing side at any time, or an option to swap players.

Also, does this mean that if a team is 5/6 but it stomping the other team, that you could end up with 4/7_

[burns1124]

davek1979, on September 30 2013 - 09:18 PM, said:

Give us a straight team switch button that works ALL THE TIME and let nature take its course.
It's worked well for the last 20 years, don't reinvent the wheel.

^ This, thisx1000000000000, needs to be what happens.

Autobalancing teams without human interaction was a bad idea when 1st posters would make threads about it because their 6v3 siege games at 5:30AM PST on a Tuesday wouldn't farm them the exp/HP/MMR they wanted...

Just stop listening to people with under 20 posts, without ~200 hours played since Raider patch, and putting in "features" that make even the most dedicated fans not want to login.

Thanks~

Burns

P.S. Fix/Give us editable HUD

Edited by burns1124, October 01 2013 - 11:30 AM.

[Rajhin]

Just great. Now unwanted switches to losing team will occur much often. Thats what I'm playing for - to be "balanced" in team against that I tried hard to win. Especially when its too late to change anything. And - what a coincidence! - thats the point when most players starts leaving. Oh and that problem when autobalance makes teams like 7v2 wasn't solved, right_

[comic_sans]

Culex, on September 30 2013 - 06:44 PM, said:

I think Jeff Magnum might remember this game which occurred on Prosk where he ended up 1v5 against us, lol.

Jeff and I rolled up in a party together for that match, and I left because it wound up being 5v7 shortly before our pub players left only the two of us vs the 7 of you.  I think the two are related, but here's hoping this helps address the problem.  The proactive display of the switch button sounds like a good solution, honestly.

Edited by comic_sans, October 01 2013 - 11:59 AM.

[Spliff_Craven]

So now when you are down 2 men; all you have to do to change the match outcome is to focus fire their top player and he becomes your salvation. Brilliant!

Why fix the game so people want to stay full matches when you can abduct the enemy teams top brass instead_

Best part is you can player repetitively as people leave due to being dominated by the other team and being screwed by former teammates; the end result being mutual annihilation due to people quitting.

I want to play HAWKEN not Highlander. There shouldn't be only one!

Yes, HAWKEN is becoming a game of stamina. See who can wait out the team switch long enough to win the match!

I still say Summers Open Beta had better player retention than Ascension does. I am disappointed.

One proactive I see is the voluntary "switch team option"
I personally won't be using it, but there are people that will.
  
Stop accommodating rage quitters. Make the game exciting and engaging so that people will even want to stay when you lose.   Summers Open Beta offered that, Ascension does not.

People quit due to bad teamwork and lack of communication. You can't make someone get a mic or a headset; but you can reward people that teamplay better. This would give people a reason to work together instead of going into a team based game to torpedo the team they were "assigned" to.

[Slimjim367]

Just give us back the damn option

Removing options from players almost always results in unhappy players

So just re-instate the button and work on more important things this games needs

[Xacius]

[HWK]ZamboniChaos, on September 30 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

Now, as soon as a player on the larger team dies they will be switched immediately.

Does this include deaths from player suicides_  It should.  A player suicide still factor into the team switch.  This is useful for 2 reasons:
1) The player that may be leading a team will have control over when they want to switch.  Most of the experienced playerbase knows when it's time to switch (3v6_ lél).
2) It eliminates the need for having to find an enemy on the opposing team, thereby reducing the time required for a teamswitch.  

On a happy note ♪, I just figured out the alt-code for ♪.  It's ALT+13 (numpad).

[Xacius]

Spliff_Craven, on October 01 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

People quit due to bad teamwork and lack of communication. You can't make someone get a mic or a headset; but you can reward people that teamplay better. This would give people a reason to work together instead of going into a team based game to torpedo the team they were "assigned" to.

Sadly, I think every modern game has this type of player.  What fixes would you recommend/do you have in mind_

[Wordweaver2013]

Balancing is always a tricky issue, so I appreciate the effort, even if I understand that it will be hard to next to impossible to implement a solution that is fair and universally accepted. Personally, I have only started playing Hawken once the option to form up in teams with friends was there, so I wouldn't like to see that go. An alternative might be some behind-the-scenes solution, like adjusting damage or armour (or even other stats) by a factor (an underdog XP bonus only goes so far if the underdogs never manage to score eliminations). I definitely approve of the idea of auto-assigning newcomers to a match to the underdog team (though some behind-the-scenes number crunching might still be necessary in case of extremely experienced or unexperienced newcomers). Perhaps adding bots to a clearly underbalanced side might also be a solution (bots should be replaced when new players join, of course).
All in all, I applaud the effort to balance games. But I do see this as a harshy uphill struggle.

[Linxs]

btw ...
the Team Switch Button is still in the game, they just renamed it into Leave Match Button.

srsly Pilots, how hard can it be to leave the match and just join it again when its a 6 vs 3 or worse, u dont loose stats or anything ...

And Meteor fix this fuzzy bunny as soon as possible, you are killing your game with your worthless groupfeature , broken autobalance and the disguised team switch button

P.S. the last 8 vs 4 TDM was really fun

[parabellum_machina]

[HWK]ZamboniChaos, on September 30 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

This new feature is expected to be implemented in our next major content patch, which is currently targeted for the end of October.

NEXT MAJOR CONTENT PATCH  ...  END OF OCTOBER.

[USMC_Karl]

defekt, on October 01 2013 - 01:45 AM, said:

maschas, on October 01 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:

Can you just limit parties to playing with other parties_ I believe the overwhelming consensus is that solo players don't want to be in games with parties.

^ That.

The player base is too small to force Pre-made vs Pre-made without those parties sitting there for a long time waiting for other teams to show up in the queue.  Also, no sensible designer would ever allow Pre-made vs Pubes to occur; evidence for why is evident.

The Party system needs to be changed to only be Pre-made vs Pre-made -- if you want to party up you must accept that whilst the game is not well populated you will be sitting in the queue for a while -- or it should be shelved until the game is populous enough to cope with it.  To allow Pre-mades to go up against Pubes is sheer lunacy that will, if it hasn’t already, damage player retention.  The team balance routines will have zero impact upon this issue whilst parties are not allowed to be broken up by it.

I can understand this attitude, but I think it's the wrong way to go about things.  Either way you are running the risk of alienating one of the player bases, but I think the group mechanic is something that we just can't stop.  I mean, if players want to drop together there is always the "friend -> join game" option.  

What should happen instead of separate queues is that the autobalancer should have a list of priorities.  Basically splitting up parties as an absolute last resort.  That way everyone can play together, and we can still have at least some semblance of "fair" matches.

I just started playing but have noticed an awful lot of one sided matches, but I don't normally quit them.  I mean, even if I'm getting stomped I still get a chance to shoot some robits and get some sweet, sweet money.  It's pretty much inevitable that there will be unbalanced matches, especially in the "pub" category.  The autobalancer should work on trying to keep the team numbers even, and let everything else sort itself out.

I will say that I like the (re_)addition of the switch teams button.  I will gladly switch over to the losing team if there is any kind of stacking.  

I'm sure it's been touched on by the more experienced players, but there should be a bit more incentive for sticking out the match.  Maybe something like simply splitting the XP/HC that the player gets for kills and the like, 50% instant and 50% rewarded at the end of the match.  That way everyone will have more incentive to stick out the full round.  That, though, has it's own pitfalls.  It would be rather lame to lose out on some of your experience because you lost connection to the server.  It's really all just a balancing game, and I'm willing to see where it goes.

[Xer06siX]

Sounds good but what about the mechs rating. Well I guess it doesn't matter if they are the first one to go out. lmao. I do like the personal option to switch during the match.

Cheers!

[Spliff_Craven]

Xacius, on October 01 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:

Spliff_Craven, on October 01 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

People quit due to bad teamwork and lack of communication. You can't make someone get a mic or a headset; but you can reward people that teamplay better. This would give people a reason to work together instead of going into a team based game to torpedo the team they were "assigned" to.

Sadly, I think every modern game has this type of player.  What fixes would you recommend/do you have in mind_

I have a couple of ideas:

I feel that a lot of noobies don't get "proper instruction" {and they don't know how to communicate with P2T}.
With understanding the importance of communication; part of the tutorial should include the push to talk set up. If nothing else it makes players aware that it is there and there is a key bind for it.

In Super Monday Night Combat {SMNC} they put one of my suggestions to use and had a TRAINING ARENA that explained the various abilities and player levels in a self-paced environment. A player could duel the environment, test weapons, try out your special abilities and there were buttons all over the place to hit for information.
Friends could join and test with you. There was no experience to gain, but the knowledge was invaluable. There was also a much better team play experience.
As the game developed there was a PVE arena that one could solo or go with a group as well.
It opened like a server and there were other live players in it.
The whole training experience was excellently done and left the player with a "night at the gym" feeling.
As SMNC is F2P I submit anyone {especially the DEV's} try it out for a fresh idea.

A COMM ROSE may help like what's used in BATTLEFIELD 2142. It was invaluable to a team and was well thought out so even a player without a mic could be effective in communicating with teammates.

I also feel EXPLO maps with dumbfire could help noobies learn the maps for stratiegic and tactical purposes. {Dumbfire is firing with indicator of hits but no damage to anyone's mech. Nobody dies.}
This would also give them a chance to learn to converse with a DEV or other Hawken in real time rather than support tickets. Personally I enjoy giving new players tutorials and showing "secrets". Which brings me to my next point...

SECRETS!

Quit putting invisiceilings on things and "blocking" secret passage ways. These "exploits" are fun for new players to learn. When a new player has another player show him a "secret" they for a connection to a player. A feeling of growth with the game is important isn't it_
When the high platforms were accessible people would wonder "How did he do that_" now there is no wonder and no access... Removal has detracted from the experience of Hawken as a whole.
I wouldn't have made it easier to get to, nor would I have blocked them off. I showed people how to do it.
It was fun teaching and they had fun learning.

We also developed a "skill" of teamwork. We called it the buddy push.
In order to access some high spots we would have the one mech boost and another would walk under and boost then another. As a team we managed to work together and achieve a "high point advantage". Sometimes it proved quite useful and other times frugal but it always made the game interesting; and we developed communication as a team.

The little things like deploying a "bubble" on attacking players to rush the enemy stronghold or deploying a repair charge for a damaged team mate repairing enhances us as players and makes for a great game.

Easter Eggs make the game feel like you accomplished something.

Since Ascension:

High grounds are generally inaccessible.
VOIP is intermittent.
There are too many unlocks now. Tuning points and Mech levels and then the multi item levels make developing a mech to new players tedious and intimidating.
The Newer Maps are smallish and don't have accessibility. Blue walls prevent a lot of fresh attack angles and do too much channeling and some things you should be able to access have invisible ceilings.

Summary:

I and many others feel our previous OPEN BETA was more enjoyed over the summer. Ascension appears to have lost a lot of players due to the new complexities. and there seems to be less commitment to the game as a whole because of it.
There is nothing to stimulate player communication... They feel no need for it. No glue to bind them and encourage player connections to one another. Isn't that why we play games_ To develop skill and connections with people_

Make that the direction of HAWKEN and I know the game will grow and succeed. Fail to heed this advice and HAWKEN will always experience turbulence and lose player retention.

This is just a tip of what I have to say on the topic {it's late and I need sleep} but they are probably the biggest chunks that need to be addressed.
Does this help answer your question Xacius_

Edited by Spliff_Craven, October 02 2013 - 01:44 AM.

[defekt]

USMC_Karl, on October 01 2013 - 06:10 PM, said:

defekt, on October 01 2013 - 01:45 AM, said:

maschas, on October 01 2013 - 12:01 AM, said:

Can you just limit parties to playing with other parties_ I believe the overwhelming consensus is that solo players don't want to be in games with parties.

^ That.

The player base is too small to force Pre-made vs Pre-made without those parties sitting there for a long time waiting for other teams to show up in the queue.  Also, no sensible designer would ever allow Pre-made vs Pubes to occur; evidence for why is evident.

The Party system needs to be changed to only be Pre-made vs Pre-made -- if you want to party up you must accept that whilst the game is not well populated you will be sitting in the queue for a while -- or it should be shelved until the game is populous enough to cope with it.  To allow Pre-mades to go up against Pubes is sheer lunacy that will, if it hasn’t already, damage player retention.  The team balance routines will have zero impact upon this issue whilst parties are not allowed to be broken up by it.

I can understand this attitude, but I think it's the wrong way to go about things.  Either way you are running the risk of alienating one of the player bases, but I think the group mechanic is something that we just can't stop.  I mean, if players want to drop together there is always the "friend -> join game" option.

It’s more than just an attitude, it’s a fact of the territory.  If ADH are hell bent on applying matchmaking to the gaming landscape then the above conditions for success ring true: you cannot allow parties to join pube games as that completely undermines the whole point of having MM.  If the MM routines are allowed to split up teams then that completely undermines the whole point of having Parties.  ADH can’t have it both ways without making everything super-convoluted and, frankly, frustrating for everyone involved.

I’m pretty sure that ADH have weighed the pros and cons and have taken the decision to allow Pre-mades to match against pubes simply because it’s a temporary affair, a beta; an experiment, if you will.  I don’t expect the current mechanism to be a long term solution (more fool them if it is) and come v1.0 Pre-mades will only match against Pre-mades, not pubes.  It’s the only sensible solution.

[Kravcheski]

Updates Everywhere xD

[LoC_TR]

In my experience much of the imbalance occurs when players quit out in between games, the longer you stay in the server with the same ppl, the more teams can get shaken up evenly. If players are constantly joining and quitting you have to account for more variables instead of going off your score.

For instance; I had several games last night that were very close 35/40, 39/40, etc. For the most part these were the same ppl i had played with for several matches, each time I had a different team some worse than others. Either way we must have played 5 or so matches that were all very close

This gets me thinking maybe you could have a daily avg, or  whatever your previous three games scores avgs.

Or possibly you do a full server warm-up game to help the autobalance place you better. A bit like how starcraft 2 has ladder seasons, you play 5 matches, depending on how you play it places you in a league; bronze, silver, gold etc. Obviously hawken doesn't have the population to sustain leagues of that size.. Idk there must be a better way of determining a player's skill.. I'm not the Developer! You figure it out!

Edit: You could let us garage in the debrief so we don't have to leave...............

Edited by LoC_TR, October 02 2013 - 03:44 AM.

[zorin1]

I have noticed one thing that might help the devs.  We were starting a new game.  Team A had 2 people, Team B had 3.  I noticed that 3 people were conneting to Team A.  Those 3 people left before their names showed up.  The game started with 2 verse 3.  While in the game new plays came but they always went to Team B.  At the end of the game Team A had 3 people and Team B was maxed out.  I am thinking that the timeout connected people at the being is what caused the issue.

Zorin1