Lets hope the team balancing is better.

World War II General Discussion

Tbh I don't know for sure what they did different this year. If I had to guess, I'd say that they made the team balancing system try to make the average kd of the team's as close as possible. So since my kd is on the higher side, it puts me with the 5 lowest. What I have noticed. If there is someone in the lobby with a kd close to, but under mine, it puts the "better" of the potatoes on his team. Generally, im the highest kd player in the lobby, so, the vast majority of the time I get the bottom 5 of the lobby. And that's just silly.  

If I could choose, I would tell them to make it 100% random. When making a lobby, make it 100% based on connection. Then split it randomly. I can handle losing when I deserve to lose. But when I go 40 and 5 and shoot down every streak the enemy puts up, I deserve the W. I shouldn't have 3 teammates that go 25 negative every game. No other cod I've played has been like this. My kd on bo3 is just under 3. And my games are enjoyable. I lose some, but when I do, it's generally my fault. But it's waaaay different in IW. It makes me not want to play. And I want to play. I want to enjoy the newest cod. 

Other than this one thing, I can handle the rest of the IW bs.

gotsomestars Level 75
Likes: 11278
Posts: 15377
Registered: ‎21-03-2013

I hear ya. I just remember it being a fairly popular topic last year too.

 

It's hard for me to have a clear perspective over the past couple years because I've been playing with a full party most of the time. Which has it's own host of problems with connection and forcing MM/team balance.

iHattoriHanzo0 Level 75
Likes: 7503
Posts: 7518
Registered: ‎08-10-2013

@iHattoriHanzo0 wrote:

I always play to win but to be honest... i don't care if I do or don't anymore. Especially with things like parties, MM, and balancing... there is only so much you can do when the odds are stacked for or against you.

 

I will hope balancing gets better for your sake.. but what needs to happen for that to happen? Kinda reminds me of why SHG focused on SBMM in AW... "And yes, to a lesser extent skill as a component of matchmaking is important, too. We believe that it adds a level of fairness in the mechanism for team balance and individual enjoyment." from... CharlieIntel: Condrey Talks SBMM in AW

 

I'm perfectly fine with that. But we know how vocal many were during that time. Some players love beating up on those potatoes. Smiley Wink


well said. 

 

I am in this level now, I could care less what happenes with the win or lose now a days. I play, for furn, for the win, to beat the better enemy player. I dont care about losing as much as I use to. But it can be frustrating when you are trying to finish in game accomplishments. 

 

 

"We do not rise to the level of our expectations. We fall to the level
of our training"
Izjar11 Level 75
Likes: 9409
Posts: 16821
Registered: ‎14-11-2011

I can handle losing, as long as the game feels fair. If I go 40 and 2 in a tdm game, that should be a win in most cases. And in all the other cods I've played. That is the case. I may lose a 99 to 100 game every now and then, and I'm cool with that. But when I'm constantly going +30, and constantly losing, it just doesn't feel right.

I know it doesn't add to the validity but a few YouTube guys have mentioned it this year as well. And I don't mean the cod hating YouTube guys. I mean the guys that are generally pretty level headed,  like prestige is key, and xclusiveace.  There's just something different about it. 

Sometimes I can put it out of my head for the first couple games. But when it keeps happening over and over it just gives me the feeling that I can't win no matter what I do. And my main reason for playing any game is to win. To be fair I get a little too competitive.  Maybe it's because when I was younger, my parents weren't on the participation trophy train. If I was going to play, I had to do what I could to get the win.

But, anyways,  I just hope it's better. Ideally I'd want them to form the lobby 100% by connection.  Then split the team's 100% randomly. Or as close to 100% random as you can get in the coding world.

gotsomestars Level 75
Likes: 11278
Posts: 15377
Registered: ‎21-03-2013

Any game with more players is hard to balance.

What should the parameters be for the balancing.

K/D? well somebody only plays with smgs and a good k/d but than he takes at a bolt action rifle and sucks with it.

And k/d doesn't mean a lot in for example domination.

 

 

 

Roll the dice. Life is a gamble
GRaS is OP. Green Stars are OP
SaND get's everywhere
dtuchpunk Level 75
Likes: 4267
Posts: 14634
Registered: ‎09-06-2011

@dtuchpunk wrote:

Any game with more players is hard to balance.

What should the parameters be for the balancing.

K/D? well somebody only plays with smgs and a good k/d but than he takes at a bolt action rifle and sucks with it.

And k/d doesn't mean a lot in for example domination.

 

 

 


As I said in 3 posts so far. The parameters are relatively simple. Building the lobby is 100% based on connection. Once the 12 players are in the lobby, the team's are 100% random.

gotsomestars Level 75
Likes: 11278
Posts: 15377
Registered: ‎21-03-2013

@gotsomestars wrote:

@dtuchpunk wrote:

Any game with more players is hard to balance.

What should the parameters be for the balancing.

K/D? well somebody only plays with smgs and a good k/d but than he takes at a bolt action rifle and sucks with it.

And k/d doesn't mean a lot in for example domination.

 

 

 


As I said in 3 posts so far. The parameters are relatively simple. Building the lobby is 100% based on connection. Once the 12 players are in the lobby, the team's are 100% random.


I 100% agree with this. The DEVS have proven over and over and over they can not create a working SBMM or a Lobby Team MM that works. Drop everyone local with similar connections in a lobby and let them do their thing.  Newer players have custom games and bots they can use to sharpen their skills on without their stats taking a beating. They should not have to dumb down the experience for everyone to cater to newer players or players that don't spend as much time playing. 

MurkBeserk Level 75
Likes: 1672
Posts: 3991
Registered: ‎12-10-2016

I want new players to have fun, but they're not going to have fun if they live in the UK and get matched with people from Japan to Saudi Arabia to the eastern USA.  And people from the north eastern USA shouldn't be matched with people across the country. Even now I get people from all over the USA in my matches, even when they have a server farm right next to them. And like your case, why on earth would it put you anywhere but the Chicago dedi?

Here's another thing. I get players in most of my matches that go 25 to 35 negative. If they are going to go negative no matter what, you might as well make the lobby as stable as possible. 

It's just silly to build a lobby using anything other than connection. 

gotsomestars Level 75
Likes: 11278
Posts: 15377
Registered: ‎21-03-2013

I missed that post I guess.

 

It sounds better

More random

Only people playing in party's will screw it up. 

One with a bad connection and one with a good connection.

Will the go in the good connection pool or bad connection or somewhere in te middle.

 

 

Roll the dice. Life is a gamble
GRaS is OP. Green Stars are OP
SaND get's everywhere
dtuchpunk Level 75
Likes: 4267
Posts: 14634
Registered: ‎09-06-2011

Parties are an issue any way you look at it. The only real fix would be to not have them. And that won't happen. Wouldn't want it to. 

I would guess they would do as they do now, and use the host to determine the pool. One thing that would help this situation is an in game filter. If anyone,party or not, has a ping 100ms over the average, they get kicked from the game. I know this would never happen,  but it's nice to dream.

gotsomestars Level 75
Likes: 11278
Posts: 15377
Registered: ‎21-03-2013

Studios