The 2/10 players aren't a problem for the others as the 25/2 players are.
....
--
*Incidentally, the 25/2 players could also restrict themselves to non combat roles. But they don't do that because they don't have too. The good players (= potential 25/2s) who are nice and restrict themselves (and hence don't get to 25/2) aren't the problem.
If you didn't have the 50% of the team 2/10 players in every server you wouldn't have the people going 25/2. *not talking about new players at all*
Also your idea is fucking terrible. Kicking players because they are too good? What the fuck am I supposed to do? Play competitive because that's where ill find games any time i want? What If I want to relax when I get home and bobble around as gorge? You still going to kick me when i get 20:1 kdr with that? It's a non combat role...
@current1y obviously you're not allowed to attack in any form. No spit, no hydras, babblers only if they're attached to a player, and only healspray in the hive room if no marines are present.
@current1y obviously you're not allowed to attack in any form. No spit, no hydras, babblers only if they're attached to a player, and only healspray in the hive room if no marines are present.
Geesh...
So basically Current1y's first 300 hours of NS2 playing at 10 fps minus the babblers. :P
If rookies could only join rookie only servers I could see a problem. What if I am that one guy who bought the game outside of a sale and can't find a populated rookie only server. I try to seed one but only two other rookies join, because only rookies can join, and it is an unexciting game consisting of only three people who don't know what they are doing.
SpoogeThunderbolt missile in your cheeriosJoin Date: 2002-01-25Member: 67Members
If UWE expects the existing community of players to educate rookies on how to play, then separating the new guys from the pros would be counterproductive.
Yes, I hate getting pub stomped. However, if rookies or even newer players don't have access to players who actually know what they're doing, they're not going to experience a number of strategies or techniques that will help them improve.
Does that mean the current system is good to go? Absolutely not. Again, rookies do not have a viable way to learn what they're doing before joining open play on a server.
I sincerely hope that the development of bots means they're working overtime to get a solid single-player trainer in place for the next major content update.
With regards to balancing servers its a very difficult problem to address as the more you try to force the teams to be built in a more balanced fashion. The more you take away from players in terms of flexibility of play. Its for this reason I think this is something that should be explored more by mods than it should be implemented into the vanilla game. This way the player can choose to play on a server that implements their preferred method of balance.
I also think that it is very important for the game to not separate rookies from the main playerbase, or to give rookies a simplified version of the game. A big part of the learning process (unfortunately) is getting utterly destroyed. As an example a very early game skulk IP rush is an effective way of ending the game in seconds if not responded to. Its something that all marine players need to be aware of, and most of the time need to be taught the lesson the hard way.
Unfortunately with NS2, its a very deep game and there are far to many of these lessons to be taught before someone starts playing. I dont think that simplifying the game to get around this is an option, nor is simplifying it temporarily for new players and having an inconsistency in how the game plays out. Although this is delving more into the problems the game has with a steep learning curve.
I was someone who was new with NS2 (joined a few months before release) and had not touched NS1. Despite getting completely trashed for a long time at the game, at the time of my joining in game voice chat was far busier, and I think was probably one of the biggest reasons I stuck to the game.
I loved the communication I saw in pub games compared to other FPS games id previously played. And I figured out very quickly that using the voice system effectively made a big difference to my play and my teams play. In games nowadays that are heavily rookie based and dont go well for my team, being someone who is happy to help nudge a rookie in the right direction my biggest frustration is people that ignore voice chat. In many cases team balance causing very short games or games that dont finish is down to lack of communication from the team.
I dont claim to have any great solutions to team balance problems or player retention, but I think the in game voice system is something that needs to be played up a lot more. Im sure anyone here who thinks about the more enjoyable NS2 experiences they have had I bet most of them would be where the team communicated well, and even if you didnt win, those moments when a whole bunch of you are playing as a group is much more fun and engaging.
dePARAJoin Date: 2011-04-29Member: 96321Members, Squad Five Blue
edited July 2013
So you want balance but wont split totally new players with 1 hr of gameplay from div1 clanplayers?
One div1 player rape 10 marines alone as fade.
You really think its enjoyable for the marines to get slaugtered?
You really think its enjoyable for the div1 player that the rest of his team isnt doing any usefull and aliens lose in the end?
You really think its enjoiyable to explain the game over and over again in every game 7 days the week?
Clanplayers have no place to have some fast games:
Gather can took ages to fill
Clanwars need organizing.
End the end, they go pub and slaughter rookies.
You cannot "balance" that.
The only solution is:
Give every skill level a place to play.
Q: But what am I supposed to do? I want to have fun playing too!
A: The other 15 people on the server don't care.
Q: Rookies can't get better when they don't get pubstomped!!!
A: Rookies need people better than them, but not the vastly better pubstompers who just make them give up and leave.
I'm not even saying good players should be kicked. The thread simply asked for ways to balance servers, and mine is a possible answer Like it or not, that's not the point.
I'm not going to further derail the thread, so that's it for me regarding my kick proposal.
There isn't enough players to do any sort of balancing.
The problem is lack of players.
That's my concern too. Obviously some kind of matchmaking is the answer to balance problems, but what if you can't do it? For example, you probably couldn't get a server full only with the 25/2 like players.
If you don't have enough people to get the perfect matchmaking experience, then the matchmaking experience isn't perfect. It's probably still better than random, however, and surely any improvement will help?
I certainly don't enjoy game after game of people having no clue what to do, so I try to get the vast majority of my gaming done in the competitive setting now. Now I'm the newbie again, and it's great
You might not be able to get a pub server full of 25/2-level players, but if you get a server full of 25/2, 15/2, 10/2 and 5/2 players, then you're going to have a far far better experience than in your current example where there are lots of players getting owned by one or two far better players. Again, the argument for this is that perfection should not get in the way of adequacy. A moderate improvement from the current situation will help retain players for longer and give more of a challenge to more people (playing against more similarly-skilled opponents). I think that's worth going for.
In addition (didn't warrant an edit as it's a different point)...
The best way to achieve this IMHO is on-the-fly. Don't have servers which set their desired level, as this will create division. It's been mentioned already in this thread, but when players search for servers to play on, they should be able to be shown servers which currently have players roughly around their skill level. There is no point in blocking servers from people, but instead colour-code the server name in the browser to highlight servers which currently have very much higher 'skilled' players on as red, and people around your level as green, and say blue for servers with players of lower skill on average. Or more colour blind friendly colours, but you get the idea. Personally, if I was coding it, I'd make the hue value proportional to the 'difference in skill' so that you have a better idea of just how much higher/lower skill the server currently is.
Hours played would be an easy, approximate first step and could form the basis of a system which could then be tweaked. It's much easier to edit than it is to create, so I'd vote for starting with a simple measure such as time played, see how it works out, then modify as required.
I think balancing the game in its current state with the playerbase is impossible. The problem lies in the huge gaps that exist with regards to player skill, and this cant be addressed with separation as the community is too small. Even less forceful solutions will only serve as a reason for people not to play in certain games rather than get involved and get better.
I am personally of the opinion a better investment of time would be in improving average player skill, be it through the players or systems in the game to help people learn how to play well, and encouraging them to play together.
hours played is directly proportional to skill level
it's a very good metric to start with
I've seen people with 60 hours who play like they're pro simply because of past experience.. can't say this is accurate but guess playtime does relate to game understanding in a sense.. would hope someone with 300 hours would at least know what's going on even if they weren't the best of players
Who cares if 60 hours don't exactly dictate skill level? It does dictate ability to understand basic concepts of the game. I guarantee anyone here that a server that has a requirement of 100+ hours of NS played over one without would yield a significant difference in gameplay overall. The rookie tags are just pointless IMHO.
hours played is a quick fix to solve a ton of problems. not only is it easier to measure than some imaginary "skill level" but it's going to be 100-1000 times quicker to program...
right now games are starting with experienced players vs. beginners without anyone knowing....
if you put hours on the scoreboard and add a proper shuffling mechanism, then people will be able to spot the obvious problems instead of blaming the game or the balance or Obama or whatever
it's the same reasoning as having a green rookie color, except this will be useful for more than 3 hours of playtime
obviously replace it with some magic skill level calculation when that's ready, but who knows when that will happen when the priority is clearly elsewhere
The problem the way I see it is that UWE is trying to make one game for two totally different modes:
- Public games
- Comp games
Both of these require different mechanics due to several factors like player experience, level of team coordination, etc.
I think UWE should make two versions of NS2:
1. Classic / regular NS2 designed for public play
2. Comp mode / mod with all the modifications, nerfs and buffs they want to apply for comp games.
My other suggestion is around team stacking and the 'Vote Random' option. Most games I play start with 'Vote Random', however the teams continue to seem stacked. Would be good if NS2 recorded in the background the following for each player:
Points per round / total number of rounds played = Player Skill Level
'Vote Random' could then use this figure for each player to work out evenly matched teams.
Although the amount of hours played is only an indicative parameter for a player's skill level, it seems like it would be a relatively easy and quick way to give some weight to the randomize vote, no? Like, have it look at people's "hours played", split up the two most experienced players into opposing teams, then split up the next two, and the next two, etc...
It would be far from perfect, but still a whole lot better than the current "randomize readyroom" option we have now. Just to buy some time to work out something better.
That idea of yours wouldn't really help out new players, as practically all servers would exceed their skill level. It also wouldn't prevent team stacking (be it unintentional or not) on those servers.
So say we had a working matchmaking system, but I wanted to play aliens. I myself play aliens probably 2/3 games. I'll be happy that the game is more balanced but will still want to play aliens more often that not.
So say we had a working matchmaking system, but I wanted to play aliens. I myself play aliens probably 2/3 games. I'll be happy that the game is more balanced but will still want to play aliens more often that not.
I don't think we need a match making system, just a tweak to the 'Vote Random' option. So you can still play whatever your preferred team is normally, but only when a 'Vote Random' is called will it actually take affect.
And if you also kicked all the players that went 2/10. You will have effectively eliminated the upper and the lower class, achieving a communistic Natural Selection 2.
This is the opposite of the government style currently being implemented, which is the Facist, Evolutionary, Natural Selection ideology.
The 2/10 players aren't a problem for the others as the 25/2 players are.
Also, they can do other things (like harass RTs) where their KDR matters less*, so it's less of a problem for themselves too.
Finally, there are legitimate 2/10s, e.g. suicide harass and other suicide playstyles.
Technically, you could kick any class of players, e.g. everyone BUT the 25/2 people, or the 25/2 AND the 2/10 people. The only point is to have narrow skill distribution with as few game influencing outliers as possible.
But the majority has problems with the 25/2s and little problems with the 2/10s. So, in my opinion, it makes sense to only kick the 25/2s.
Also, I'm a bit offended that you judge my proposal as the opposite of facist. I'd like to think it is pretty fascist - blaming a small "elite" and then removing those.
I'm calling it the "Balance Endlösung"
The really interesting question is: would it work?
--
*Incidentally, the 25/2 players could also restrict themselves to non combat roles. But they don't do that because they don't have too. The good players (= potential 25/2s) who are nice and restrict themselves (and hence don't get to 25/2) aren't the problem.
That is more nazism, except you're eliminating the advanced species rather than the inferior, which leads to a more equal skill level known as communism. Whatever the mix of nazism and communism is called.
So say we had a working matchmaking system, but I wanted to play aliens. I myself play aliens probably 2/3 games. I'll be happy that the game is more balanced but will still want to play aliens more often that not.
I don't think we need a match making system, just a tweak to the 'Vote Random' option. So you can still play whatever your preferred team is normally, but only when a 'Vote Random' is called will it actually take affect.
Back in beta and not long after beta I did not think we needed match making. I thought the idea was silly. Lately though I always feel like I am in the awkward position of either pub stomping often and getting stomped. Vote random only makes random imbalances in my opinion.
And if you also kicked all the players that went 2/10. You will have effectively eliminated the upper and the lower class, achieving a communistic Natural Selection 2.
This is the opposite of the government style currently being implemented, which is the Facist, Evolutionary, Natural Selection ideology.
The 2/10 players aren't a problem for the others as the 25/2 players are.
Also, they can do other things (like harass RTs) where their KDR matters less*, so it's less of a problem for themselves too.
Finally, there are legitimate 2/10s, e.g. suicide harass and other suicide playstyles.
Technically, you could kick any class of players, e.g. everyone BUT the 25/2 people, or the 25/2 AND the 2/10 people. The only point is to have narrow skill distribution with as few game influencing outliers as possible.
But the majority has problems with the 25/2s and little problems with the 2/10s. So, in my opinion, it makes sense to only kick the 25/2s.
Also, I'm a bit offended that you judge my proposal as the opposite of facist. I'd like to think it is pretty fascist - blaming a small "elite" and then removing those.
I'm calling it the "Balance Endlösung"
The really interesting question is: would it work?
--
*Incidentally, the 25/2 players could also restrict themselves to non combat roles. But they don't do that because they don't have too. The good players (= potential 25/2s) who are nice and restrict themselves (and hence don't get to 25/2) aren't the problem.
That is more nazism, except you're eliminating the advanced species rather than the inferior, which leads to a more equal skill level known as communism. Whatever the mix of nazism and communism is called.
Comments
If you didn't have the 50% of the team 2/10 players in every server you wouldn't have the people going 25/2. *not talking about new players at all*
Also your idea is fucking terrible. Kicking players because they are too good? What the fuck am I supposed to do? Play competitive because that's where ill find games any time i want? What If I want to relax when I get home and bobble around as gorge? You still going to kick me when i get 20:1 kdr with that? It's a non combat role...
Geesh...
So basically Current1y's first 300 hours of NS2 playing at 10 fps minus the babblers. :P
Yes, I hate getting pub stomped. However, if rookies or even newer players don't have access to players who actually know what they're doing, they're not going to experience a number of strategies or techniques that will help them improve.
Does that mean the current system is good to go? Absolutely not. Again, rookies do not have a viable way to learn what they're doing before joining open play on a server.
I sincerely hope that the development of bots means they're working overtime to get a solid single-player trainer in place for the next major content update.
I also think that it is very important for the game to not separate rookies from the main playerbase, or to give rookies a simplified version of the game. A big part of the learning process (unfortunately) is getting utterly destroyed. As an example a very early game skulk IP rush is an effective way of ending the game in seconds if not responded to. Its something that all marine players need to be aware of, and most of the time need to be taught the lesson the hard way.
Unfortunately with NS2, its a very deep game and there are far to many of these lessons to be taught before someone starts playing. I dont think that simplifying the game to get around this is an option, nor is simplifying it temporarily for new players and having an inconsistency in how the game plays out. Although this is delving more into the problems the game has with a steep learning curve.
I was someone who was new with NS2 (joined a few months before release) and had not touched NS1. Despite getting completely trashed for a long time at the game, at the time of my joining in game voice chat was far busier, and I think was probably one of the biggest reasons I stuck to the game.
I loved the communication I saw in pub games compared to other FPS games id previously played. And I figured out very quickly that using the voice system effectively made a big difference to my play and my teams play. In games nowadays that are heavily rookie based and dont go well for my team, being someone who is happy to help nudge a rookie in the right direction my biggest frustration is people that ignore voice chat. In many cases team balance causing very short games or games that dont finish is down to lack of communication from the team.
I dont claim to have any great solutions to team balance problems or player retention, but I think the in game voice system is something that needs to be played up a lot more. Im sure anyone here who thinks about the more enjoyable NS2 experiences they have had I bet most of them would be where the team communicated well, and even if you didnt win, those moments when a whole bunch of you are playing as a group is much more fun and engaging.
One div1 player rape 10 marines alone as fade.
You really think its enjoyable for the marines to get slaugtered?
You really think its enjoyable for the div1 player that the rest of his team isnt doing any usefull and aliens lose in the end?
You really think its enjoiyable to explain the game over and over again in every game 7 days the week?
Clanplayers have no place to have some fast games:
Gather can took ages to fill
Clanwars need organizing.
End the end, they go pub and slaughter rookies.
You cannot "balance" that.
The only solution is:
Give every skill level a place to play.
Q: But what am I supposed to do? I want to have fun playing too!
A: The other 15 people on the server don't care.
Q: Rookies can't get better when they don't get pubstomped!!!
A: Rookies need people better than them, but not the vastly better pubstompers who just make them give up and leave.
I'm not even saying good players should be kicked. The thread simply asked for ways to balance servers, and mine is a possible answer
I'm not going to further derail the thread, so that's it for me regarding my kick proposal.
That's my concern too. Obviously some kind of matchmaking is the answer to balance problems, but what if you can't do it? For example, you probably couldn't get a server full only with the 25/2 like players.
I certainly don't enjoy game after game of people having no clue what to do, so I try to get the vast majority of my gaming done in the competitive setting now. Now I'm the newbie again, and it's great
You might not be able to get a pub server full of 25/2-level players, but if you get a server full of 25/2, 15/2, 10/2 and 5/2 players, then you're going to have a far far better experience than in your current example where there are lots of players getting owned by one or two far better players. Again, the argument for this is that perfection should not get in the way of adequacy. A moderate improvement from the current situation will help retain players for longer and give more of a challenge to more people (playing against more similarly-skilled opponents). I think that's worth going for.
The best way to achieve this IMHO is on-the-fly. Don't have servers which set their desired level, as this will create division. It's been mentioned already in this thread, but when players search for servers to play on, they should be able to be shown servers which currently have players roughly around their skill level. There is no point in blocking servers from people, but instead colour-code the server name in the browser to highlight servers which currently have very much higher 'skilled' players on as red, and people around your level as green, and say blue for servers with players of lower skill on average. Or more colour blind friendly colours, but you get the idea. Personally, if I was coding it, I'd make the hue value proportional to the 'difference in skill' so that you have a better idea of just how much higher/lower skill the server currently is.
Hours played would be an easy, approximate first step and could form the basis of a system which could then be tweaked. It's much easier to edit than it is to create, so I'd vote for starting with a simple measure such as time played, see how it works out, then modify as required.
I am personally of the opinion a better investment of time would be in improving average player skill, be it through the players or systems in the game to help people learn how to play well, and encouraging them to play together.
I've seen people with 60 hours who play like they're pro simply because of past experience.. can't say this is accurate but guess playtime does relate to game understanding in a sense.. would hope someone with 300 hours would at least know what's going on even if they weren't the best of players
Knowledge of the game, yes. Skill ? Hell no !
right now games are starting with experienced players vs. beginners without anyone knowing....
if you put hours on the scoreboard and add a proper shuffling mechanism, then people will be able to spot the obvious problems instead of blaming the game or the balance or Obama or whatever
it's the same reasoning as having a green rookie color, except this will be useful for more than 3 hours of playtime
obviously replace it with some magic skill level calculation when that's ready, but who knows when that will happen when the priority is clearly elsewhere
- Public games
- Comp games
Both of these require different mechanics due to several factors like player experience, level of team coordination, etc.
I think UWE should make two versions of NS2:
1. Classic / regular NS2 designed for public play
2. Comp mode / mod with all the modifications, nerfs and buffs they want to apply for comp games.
My other suggestion is around team stacking and the 'Vote Random' option. Most games I play start with 'Vote Random', however the teams continue to seem stacked. Would be good if NS2 recorded in the background the following for each player:
Points per round / total number of rounds played = Player Skill Level
'Vote Random' could then use this figure for each player to work out evenly matched teams.
Pretty much. I have noticed this as well. Neither side is satisfied in the end.
It would be far from perfect, but still a whole lot better than the current "randomize readyroom" option we have now. Just to buy some time to work out something better.
@Asraniel
That idea of yours wouldn't really help out new players, as practically all servers would exceed their skill level. It also wouldn't prevent team stacking (be it unintentional or not) on those servers.
I don't think we need a match making system, just a tweak to the 'Vote Random' option. So you can still play whatever your preferred team is normally, but only when a 'Vote Random' is called will it actually take affect.
That is more nazism, except you're eliminating the advanced species rather than the inferior, which leads to a more equal skill level known as communism. Whatever the mix of nazism and communism is called.
I'll take 20.
Back in beta and not long after beta I did not think we needed match making. I thought the idea was silly. Lately though I always feel like I am in the awkward position of either pub stomping often and getting stomped. Vote random only makes random imbalances in my opinion. Stalinism?
I actually know a server that does this for fun sometimes
Have a points per hours ratio. But only count the past 100 hours.