Thoughts about viable autobalance options for a server

[Monostripezebra]

Good multiplayer gameplay is a major selling point for games, while problematic aspects can keep people people from staying long in a game and beeing interested in additional content..

 

that is probably old news for shooters, but how is it in the flightsim world?

 

 

Currently a lot of servers (see statistics) online have a high imbalance of players, usually with more numerical blue side. Especially in the case of "campaign" servers, that can reach quite extreme levels and I think it does affect the game, the comunity and the product negatively, if those things can not at least be gradually bettered.

 

But the problem is, that flightsimmers can be extremly touchy about what sides they fly and normal team-balance options like in any other game (for instance: allowing only joining to a disadvantaged side, once the difference reaches a predefined unequality) can encounter highly negative views. So my question/suggestion here to all is, to debate and find ways in wich fair balancing mechanism could work, serversided, for a flightsim?

 

 

 

I´d like to start with one suggestion:

 

To allow for maximum freedom and flexibility, I would like to see a balancing mechanism, where values are opened to the server operators, so things can be custom tailored to mission demands.

 

This could take the form of "slots" ie: Server operators could define after how many players on one side a further joining of that said would be locked. Example: defining 35 out of a 74 slot server as "Luftwaffe" and locking further LW options once that number has been reached.

 

Other variables could also be used, for instance absolute difference. Example: at over N=10 players, joining the side that has more then a 2:1 advantage could be locked and further joining players would be autoassigned (without side change time penalty) to the other team.

 

 

 

 

 

overall, I would really hate to see the campaigns made by enthusiasts with a lot of time and effort and that offer a great deal of the more attractive online gameplay side to be effectively ruined by side numbers like these:

 

surely, that can not be in the interest of anyone loving online flightsims (and it is a persisten problems in other sims, too)

 

[=TBAS=Sshadow14]

only good balance would be 2-1 in favour of RU due to the numbers we saw on the front in ww2
Heck more russians died there than like all german in ww2 died

[Original_Uwe]

Well it's an idea but it's doomed to utter failure.

 

Largely because of people like me.

 

As it is currently I will not fly Russian. I enjoy flying some of the Russian planes like the mig-3, and will do so as OPFOR in unit training, but in our virtual battles I refuse to fly the colors of the single most evil political idea in human history-soviet Russia and its satellites.

 

So that said if your system was implemented or any such system that would force a pilot to one side or another I take my squad where we can fly German planes. If RAF or USAAF were options then I'd have no problem personally but as a squad we fly for the Luftwaffe, so you tell us we have to fly Russian we just go elsewhere.

[-SF-Disarray]

So let me get this strait: You won't fly Red in a video game because Communism is bad and political ideology matters in video games. Instead you will fly for the Natzies... Because they are good? Nope, not making a damn bit of sense after I wright it either.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Disarray

[Original_Uwe]

No it doesn't, not at all.

My biggest gripe about ostfront games is there are no good guys, but the soviets made the nazis look like a armatures

[Thad]

Salutations Pilots,

 

Personally, I try to very hard tp keep any political or social views of mine or others out of my simulation participation. In the past, on WWII Online, I chose to fly for the Germans because I liked the bf 109. I liked the Spitfire too.. but made a player choice.

 

In IL2, I also lean towards the German planes and the Bf 109 because I am more familiar with them and they seem to be easier to fly. For now. But I'm also attracted to the MC 202 because is it different, beautuful and Italian. I am drawn to the the P-40 and the upcoming P-39 simply because they were American made and I am an American. If the P-39 is well presented and capable, I will probably be spending a LOT of time in its cockpit. I also really like the look and apparent flying capabilities of the MIG 3 and the Sturmovik is one tough bugger.

 

My political views or opinions have very little 'or nothing' to do with my online flying choices. On the other hand... I find it nonsensical to fly historically simulated planes without the historically accurate national insignias. So I download skins that portray the swastika. That does NOT mean I am a Nazi or a Nazi sympathizer at all! I just prefer historically accurate paint schemes on craft supposedly being presented and featured in a quasi historical accurate world setting and period. I think trying to be 'politically correct' in this regard contributes to the thinking of bad past political ideologies. I, for one, choose not to and just want to enjoy the online and offline competition in a simulated historical setting.

 

I realize that none of this has anything to do with play balance but I piqued my interests. Actually, arbitrarily balancing things would probably be very difficult and would most like annoy a lot of players. It's a tough problem to address for online play.

 

Watch your six pilots.

Edited March 16, 2017 by Thad

[Scojo]

Dang only 2 posts for this to become mired in political filth. That has to be a record.

 

As far as the actual topic is concerned, I'm ok with them giving the mission makers the tools. If people don't like it, they can avoid servers that use it.

 

I do think that will result in the feature never being used, though lol

[Nibbio]

As far as the actual topic is concerned, I'm ok with them giving the mission makers the tools. If people don't like it, they can avoid servers that use it.

 

Same here.

[Brano]

If someone ever wants to call MP e-sport,autobalance must be there. In real team sports its in the very core of the rules. They play football 11 vs 11. Not 2 against 20.

[Y29.Layin_Scunion]

The tu quoque is insurmountable in here...

 

Wehraboos are always good for a laugh.

[Monostripezebra]

Sometimes, I really don´t know what to say.

 

If flightsims have, ever in history, archived oversimulating one goal, it has to be the simulation of bratty, overinflated pilotegos, sidetracked by totally irrelevant trivial questions of personal oppinon.

 

 

 

Maybe dogs can warm the players hearts for flying some simulated soviet aircraft in a game? Maybe?

Edited March 16, 2017 by Monostripezebra

[JG13_opcode]

I find people who bring morality into video games to be very silly because there were good and bad people on all sides.  Churchill wasn't such a good guy either; go read about him.  

 

Unfortunately I think team balancing just doesn't work well.  Flight simming is not like CounterStrike where you can hop on for 15 minutes.  A good sortie takes at least an hour (for me, anyways).  If I'm in the mood to fly the 190 and can't because the Luftwaffe side is full, I'd rather not fly at all.

Edited March 18, 2017 by JG13_opcode

[Nocke]

I am really so much looking forward to the coop mode. All you LW only guys can then fly alone... Just don't get this attitude.. and sadly, yes, it seems balancing will not work. In a "community" apparently consisting of a bunch of LW-only gamers, plus a bunch of others being willing to fly anything, but practically finding themselves deprived from the possibility to fly their German planes, for balancing reasons. Seriously, I never saw anybody saying he's flying red only. LW, so many..

[Lusekofte]

I think op have had the best suggestion so far on how to regulate teams, auto balance is common in FPS games . If a team can have at most 45 players, in a server , there will be possible for red pilots to join. I seen in two servers the number of red has been less than 10 and all slots where filled. God knows what all those 109 are doing in a axis only server

[Scojo]

I am really so much looking forward to the coop mode. All you LW only guys can then fly alone... Just don't get this attitude.. and sadly, yes, it seems balancing will not work. In a "community" apparently consisting of a bunch of LW-only gamers, plus a bunch of others being willing to fly anything, but practically finding themselves deprived from the possibility to fly their German planes, for balancing reasons. Seriously, I never saw anybody saying he's flying red only. LW, so many..

They can all just team kill each other. Then the complaining about over modelling will finally end..... maybe

[Pail]

 

 

armatures

 

https://www.google.com.au/search?q=armatures&client=firefox-b&tbm=isch&tbo=u&source=univ&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwihvpX34uHSAhWPQpQKHbhmCbYQ7AkIjwE&biw=1920&bih=946

 

No comment otherwise. I wouldn't want to harm a zebra post.

[Monostripezebra]

I find people who bring morality into video games to be very silly because there were good and bad people on all sides.  Churchill wasn't such a good guy either; go read about him.  

 

Unfortunately I think team balancing just doesn't work well.  Flight simming is not like CounterStrike where you can hop on for 15 minutes.  A good sortie takes at least an hour (for me, anyways).  If I'm in the mood to fly the 190 and can't because the Luftwaffe side is full, I'd rather not fly at all.

 

Without ever wanting to go into the discussion of gradual differences in good and bad that might matter to some: A game is not history and trying to overmoralize it and intermingle it with the real world proceedings is neither going to make sense or the game any better... I have a hard time understanding how people can not understand that.

 

I can however understand very well that you want to to take your favourite plane for a ride. I guess we all feel like that one day or another. And I can understand why one would go elsewhere if your in the mood for a specific thing and you just can´t viably have it on the current server.

But I really struggle to understand how people join a totally onesided game, care about the game outcome and even fly a fighter with about NILL chance of actually getting into play.

 

In the end, we all payed for the full game, so trying out and learning something about the less favourite planes, their history and how they are modeled in the game.. and that will always be fun. For instance I only discovered through experimentation, that the Pe2 is a real masterpiece in this sim (ok, maybe not the damage model..) just because it has a real interesting FM and diverse roles. It is endless fun. How can people not want to try out the other side, if the only other alternative is having really really boring gameplay?

 

But I guess for now we´re stuck with "if you´re willing to do both sides, you´re a commie!11!" nonsense.

 

[JG13_opcode]

I am really so much looking forward to the coop mode. All you LW only guys can then fly alone... Just don't get this attitude.. and sadly, yes, it seems balancing will not work. In a "community" apparently consisting of a bunch of LW-only gamers, plus a bunch of others being willing to fly anything, but practically finding themselves deprived from the possibility to fly their German planes, for balancing reasons. Seriously, I never saw anybody saying he's flying red only. LW, so many..

 

You must not have been around during Forgotten Battles and 1946, then.  A lot of the "Red only" guys are still playing games that feature Mustangs or Spitfires or P-47s or whatever else they fly exclusively.  A lot of these guys spent many years on Warclouds where you could be guaranteed your 1943-45 ride of choice, and a lot of them would rather not fly at all than fly VVS, and for every "LW only" player there's an equal number of people who think I'm a literal Nazi and probably have red bedsheets with swastikas on them.

 

I can however understand very well that you want to to take your favourite plane for a ride. I guess we all feel like that one day or another. And I can understand why one would go elsewhere if your in the mood for a specific thing and you just can´t viably have it on the current server.

Indeed. Sometimes when I'm in a "I just want to fly" mood and it's a 1941 map I'd much rather fly il2 sorties or take a LaGG up for a spin.

 

But I really struggle to understand how people join a totally onesided game, care about the game outcome and even fly a fighter with about NILL chance of actually getting into play.

My secret is I don't care about the game outcome. If we lose WOL map #347437 out of 12375474383764, I really couldn't care less. If we win a map on TAW I know it's just going to get reversed overnight while I'm asleep, so winning maps is meaningless to me. I defend objectives and escort bombers because that's where the action is, but at the end of the day I just fly for the fun and challenge of air combat. The other day on WOL someone was raging in the chat because we were losing the mission... maybe it's because I'm not 23 any more but I can't imagine getting that worked up over a friggin' video game.

 

But I guess for now we´re stuck with "if you´re willing to do both sides, you´re a commie!11!" nonsense.

Is anyone claiming that?

[Nocke]

I have been around in 1946, although with different nicks. I agree my statement there would be no red only pilots is wrong, exaggerated. But the general situation was exactly the same. If you entered any server to choose the side with less pilots, you flew allied 99% of the time. And that, on the long run, to say it forum rules compliant, is not good.

[JG13_opcode]

Depends on the server, I suppose.

 

Spits/109s was routinely Allied-heavy because a lot of Axis pilots couldn't stand GunRunner and his temper tantrums.

 

I have many fond memories of making it back without a kill, and feeling accomplished at having eluded a whole pack of Allies.

Edited March 20, 2017 by JG13_opcode

[Nocke]

Interesting. I don't claim my memories are correct - but they tell me Spit vs 109 was axis heavy. Seems to be all very subjective. Probably that also depends on preferred flying times.

[coconut]

There is already an auto-balance system in the game now. The annoying thing that can happen is that you join the underpopulated side, fly a mission, return home or get shot. Then you are back at the spawn screen and you find your side is now the overpopulated one. You can't spawn any more. So you wait until somebody ends their flight and now, if the gods of "airfield conditions changed" favor you, you get to fly again. That's been my experience the few times I've been able to join the axis side on a server with auto-balance on.

 

At this point, if you change side you get a point penalty (OK, who cares...) and maybe a spawn time penalty (more annoying).

[Scojo]

I don't necessarily think balance needs to always be 1:1, but there needs to be some sort of cap on just how outnumbered one side can get. Flying 2:1 as Russian is very doable and can still be fun, depending on number of targets and map size, however going higher than that is usually where the problem is.

 

We don't necessarily need an autobalance for 1:1, maybe just something to limit the ratio or cap how high one side can get.

 

When it's 3:1 against VVS, I usually just wind up leaving the server and that just makes it even harder for them

[Monostripezebra]

Well I think variable "spawn lock" options could be given to server operators, so they decide if they want absolute numbers or proportional numbers.. that would also allow for different servers and comparing how the results work and what can be popular and what not. 

 

That way you would have freedom and still a way to get over this silly and small minded, onesided destruction of efforts by missionbuilders and serverops that is 4:56 and so on.

 

I can definatly imagine missions where uneven odds are wanted or interesting.. but having it all of the time all day long is destructive.

Edited March 21, 2017 by Monostripezebra

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

If nothing else, this thread made me finally look up the definition of wehraboo.

 

On topic - just make the autobalance at +2. That way you can likely get on with your wingman but not an entire geschwader.

[JG13_opcode]

If nothing else, this thread made me finally look up the definition of wehraboo.

 

On topic - just make the autobalance at +2. That way you can likely get on with your wingman but not an entire geschwader.

 

So, big squads like TWB, 1stCL, 307, JG27, etc. that want to fly together get punished?  They can't have their squad nights?  Some of my best sorties were flown on "squad night" when several groups of 6+ squadmates would be on both sides, each trying to bully the other team.

Edited March 22, 2017 by JG13_opcode

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

I fly in a squad as well. As long as I can get on with a wingie I'm ok for the short term. We all join up as we can and eventually get on as a full squad. Dropping eight guys into a server at once can really change the dynamics of the entire game.

 

I don't think strict server balance is appropriate for all servers but I also don't think DF oriented servers should be 17-11 either. Those should be stricter on the auto balance.

 

It should be a server side decision. The really big persistent war servers can probably handle whole squads dropping in at once.

 

I should have been more clear.

Edited March 22, 2017 by II/JG17_HerrMurf

[Scojo]

I've decided that the best way to force balance is to fly the side that's heavily outnumbering the other, close the current map and then check back when the new map loads up.

 

I've surprisingly seen the balance improve after that lol

 

I guess a lot of the people on the outnumbering side decide to either leave or finally have a real opportunity to switch over, which brings the number gap down