Multiplayer Alpha Test Servers - The Team Balancer

[Chuck_Owl]

Hello folks,

 

I'd like to know what you guys think about the Team Balancer currently in place. For those who might not have noticed, the team balancer is this feature that will write "Max" over any spawn point in case one team has more players than the other. If the Axis has 12 players and the Allies have 10, you can only spawn in the Allies unless you wait for 2 other guys to join the reds.

 

Personally, while I would like this feature to remain optional (like a server setting or something), I think it is not practical at all at the current state of the game if we are to test it properly.

 

Team Balance is a feature that has been put in place since the very early days of the first person shooters. On paper, it helps the opposite teams to remain at a relatively similar strength because you have roughly the same number of players on each side. In practice, it does not take into account the fact that some people might actually want to play on the same side because they know each other. While this feature is useful in public servers where nobody really knows anyone and it's just every man for himself, I do think that flight simulators have become a much more social experience than ever before. Given the chance, people will use teamspeak. People will want to hook up with their friends. You see more and more of these groups that people call "virtual squadrons", people whose motto is often based on the element of teamplay and wingmanship. The social dimension of flight sims has become a reality and I am sure that the staff at 777 know how much it can benefit from it. Not only in terms of sales, but also in terms of publicity and good PR. People generally know how to communicate between themselves, either in the in-game chat or on the very popular and accessible Teamspeak. However, if you prevent people with the means to actually wing up and fly together, there's something definitely very wrong with the application of this concept of "social experience". 

 

777 has given us multiplayer servers to fly in, which is great. Even if they're small, it's still a nice sandbox to test server stability and stress them to their limit. However, we tend to see some servers pretty much empty, even during "peak times". One explanation is the fact that some of us like to fly with our squad mates in groups of 5 to 6. We cannot do that if the team balancer prevents us from joining the same side. Some of us in the 71st have stopped flying the alpha for this very reason: we just can't fly together and it is extremely annoying when you're used to fly as a group rather than going lone-wolf. I am sure that we are not the only guys that have stopped flying because of that.

 

Some of us also fly exclusively red or blue. I know I do fly red most of the time because I like the Russian aircraft better and the German 109s don't appeal to me as much. I like to be given the choice to pick my plane. I do not like being forced to play a side I don't want to fly, or an aircraft I don't want to fly. I find the team balancer extremely restrictive and limiting in that regard. If we are to test the servers, how can we do it if we cannot test every possible scenario? Proper coordination for tests is practically impossible to do on the current versions of the multiplayer servers (because of the balancer).

 

Some players advocate the fact that the team balancer will make the game "fair" and the teams even. While it might be true on paper, it is very different in practice. Current servers are test servers and should be considered as such. Dogfights rarely happen all at the same place, and generally numbers are pretty even as Germans have slightly superior machines (while it's still very much debatable, I know) while some players prefer to go for the underdog and fight for the Reds. Personally, I rarely see one-sided fights as both sides have bad, good and excellent pilots in equal measure. And even if a one-sided match could potentially happen, there is always a bunch of guys who do not mind switching teams of their own accord to even out the match... because they fly both sides. One-sided fights are not fun anyway, as much for the loser as for the "winner" (who, in their right mind, doesn't like to have the enemy actually fight back at him? Yeah, right... Nobody.)

 

For all these reasons, I think that the team balancer in the multiplayer servers should be switched off in the next update, even if it's just temporary, even if it's just to see what will actually happen. 777 might be surprised to see how well the community will respond to that, because many of us are just waiting for the chance to form a good old finger four and bring pain to the other team. 

 

What do you guys think about it? I am curious to know your opinion on the matter.

Edited May 7, 2014 by 71st_AH_Chuck

[AbortedMan]

I'm pretty sure it already is optional, whoever configured the servers obviously is in the "test everything" kind of mindset.

[Panzerlang]

I loathe and detest it. It is a huge time waster and it is affrontary in nature, basically dictating to a player which side he will play for. When a squad wants to hit a server and play together, as they obviously would, it creates a huge problem.

[=LD=Hethwill]

Main issue is exactly that you are already setup for the mission and in the event of being out of the fight for whatever reason you must wait in the MAX queue thing, like the slots are attached to the airfield/spawn instead of the available slots at any given moment.

 

IIRC in RoF it works like this ? You choose an airfield and go on with your mission. You get shotdown and might happen that the airfield/squadron is no longer available for respawn... but I guess many other can confirm or not this.

 

Bothers me way more the duration of the MP and especially the no warning of the mission timer. Plus there is always slots available at least in the Expert servers, even playing US latency there is no issues so to speak of.

[Soarfeat]

Nice post/topic Chuck.

This brings up some very important issues plaguing multiplayer at the moment. Seeing that this is still in development it will be interesting to see the solutions, of which I am sure will be well thought out and balanced to satisfy these problems. 

For me, this has sort of forced me to start flying the 109 ( of which I am really lousy in ), but it is quite challenging and that is what I am after. Trias ( wherever you are ), he keeps me busy in trying to learn how to handle the 109 properly --ha !!!! ( salute there Trias !! ) 

Cheers  --sf--. 

[BraveSirRobin]

What do you guys think about it? I am curious to know your opinion on the matter.

 

I think they should do whatever they feel they need to do to test their code.  

[Feathered_IV]

I enjoy flying for the side that is outnumbered.  The preoccupation of balancing gameplay to the point where every outcome balances on the head of a pin is one of the things that makes me loose interest in the online environment very quickly.

[Bearcat]

I am with Chuck... to a point... but as long as it is optional ...

[SvAF/F16_Goblin]

I really dislike it, when it happens I leave cause there is better things to do than sit in a "balance" list waiting for a slot.

[Matt]

Having a balance in numbers doesn't mean that the teams are balanced. That's why I think a balance feature like this serves no real purpose. It's more of an obstacle.

 

I'm not sure why it was implemented and how it improves testing the MP mode in any way, but maybe there's an explanation behind it.

[Chuck_Owl]

Surely, as has always been the case, this is down to admins and how they configure their server.

 

If you don't like it, find another server.

 

The few servers that are available right now, in the Alpha period, are purely there for testing, they're not indicative of how all servers will be configured after release.

 

Another server? But which one? That's kind of my point; we don't have this choice yet...

 

Flying repeatedly in the exact same test parameters kind of defies the purpose of testing. A rigorous test needs to take into account the largest number of parameters possible in order to be of valuable interest. Being restricted in the set of parameters we currently have is not of any interest for a test server, especially if 777 expects us to post bug reports. More people online means a better % of finding mistakes.

[BraveSirRobin]

Flying repeatedly in the exact same test parameters kind of defies the purpose of testing. 

 

They keep changing mission parameters.  That's what we're testing.

[Chuck_Owl]

Please read all the words I typed, from the first to the last, not just the two that you disagree with.

 

I do not practice selective reading, for your information. Thanks for treating me like I'm the local idiot, though. Much appreciated.

 

I am aware that the admins have control over these parameters.

Edited May 7, 2014 by 71st_AH_Chuck

[FuriousFrog]

Extreme maybe take a little more time to express yourself. People might better understand the deep meaningfulness of your post. I myself will retire for a couple of weeks to meditate on their hidden depths...

[71st_AH_Lucky]

Another Server? Newsflash my dear chap, there aren't any, all of them have ridiculously short timers, and team balance. Which is pretty much the issue that Chuck brought up in the original post...

 

Please explain what you meant by "Another Server"

Surely, as has always been the case, this is down to admins and how they configure their server.

If you don't like it, find another server.

Edited May 7, 2014 by 71st_AH_Lucky

[FuriousFrog]

When you reply with a "if you don't like it....", you're not going to generate a whole lot of positive feelings. As much as I appreciate brevity, it does lead to misunderstanding - as just happened.

[Chuck_Owl]

 

Back to topic before it gets out of control.

Edited May 7, 2014 by 71st_AH_Chuck

[71st_AH_Lucky]

The few servers that are available right now, in the Alpha period, are purely there for testing, they're not indicative of how all servers will be configured after release.

 

 

You quote me but appear to have snipped some out.

Funny thing about some posts, if you take a sentence or two out of context you rather lose the meaning.

 

Sir, 

 

You talk in the first post I quoted about how the "few available servers are only for testing"

 

And in the second post about how I snipped those parts out.

 

The reason I did not quote those parts is because they are useful, but well known facts.

 

The bit I did comment on, however, was the line I simply did not understand.

 

I am simply wondering what you were implying when you said "Find another server" 

 

Is English your first language? I know that many people on aviation forums are from many different places, as there are aviation enthusiasts all over the world, 

 

It's easy for someone's intentions to get lost in translation,

 

Cheers

 

Jack

[71st_AH_Lucky]

Having a balance in numbers doesn't mean that the teams are balanced. That's why I think a balance feature like this serves no real purpose. It's more of an obstacle.

 

I'm not sure why it was implemented and how it improves testing the MP mode in any way, but maybe there's an explanation behind it.

 

I, for one, agree with this. 

 

Team balance is not as important in a flight simulator, as it would be in a more closed FPS environment. 

 

The openness of a flight simulator allows for fights based more on pilot skill, as opposed to fights based even numbers. 

 

A good pilot that can maintain energy, is worth four that can't.

[BraveSirRobin]

Can anyone provide a detailed breakdown on how maintaining energy in a fight helps the development team test MP functionality?

[71st_AH_Lucky]

Gladly, Good Sir,

 

What I was trying to say, is that team balance is not essential in the first place when it comes to flight simming. Most fights depend on pilot skill in my humble opinion.

 

Therefore, I do not think that team balancing is a function that needs to be critically tested inside BoS. 

 

The Sim Community is full of gents who like to either fly Axis or Allied (Sometimes both, but usually most players have a side they build the majority of their simming hours on)

 

Likewise, there are many squads that fly, who like to be together no matter what. (Inter-squad battles are usually a training occurence) 

 

I know quite a few people, in a number of different squads (I will of course not name any names, as these conversations occured in private) Who have told me they are not flying BoS as much, because it is too much hassle to wing up with their friends.

 

Back to my original point, but rephrased: I wonder why Team Balancing is present in the first place, as (In my experience) It is actually driving players away, and less testing is being done because of it.

 

Cheers,

Jack

Can anyone provide a detailed breakdown on how maintaining energy in a fight helps the development team test MP functionality?

[AbortedMan]

Wow...guys, fellas, it's just a test bed. There's much ado about nothing here. All will be fixed and satisfactory when testing is over. No reason to write novels and essays about the economics of gameplay regarding BoS' current state.

 

Keep calm and EARLY ACCESS on.

[II/JG17_HerrMurf]

ALPHA!!

 

IBTL

[BraveSirRobin]

Back to my original point, but rephrased: I wonder why Team Balancing is present in the first place, as (In my experience) It is actually driving players away, and less testing is being done because of it.

 

 

There are 3 likely reasons why it is present:

 

1.  they are testing it

2.  they need relatively equal numbers on both sides to test other things and they don't want to depend on us to do it voluntarily (mostly because we're not very dependable, as evidenced by the people who aren't playing because they don't want to be forced to fly something they don't want to fly)

3.  they're just fucking with us (also a perfectly valid reason)

 

I would not rule out any of those, and there are probably some that I haven't considered.

Edited May 7, 2014 by BraveSirRobin

[1./KG4_Blackwolf]

We fly both red and blue but tend to stick to red (its the underdog thing) but in ROF and in BOS we do switch if we log on and more reds are on then blue. This was before the team balancing. Only three of my squad have BOS and one can't fly it at peak hours so that leaves me and Greywolf to fly it so TB is not an real big issue. If the other five had it, then yes. I can see where it would turn away a big squad thats main gameplay is to fly as a team and cover each other not fly on different sides. That said this is all early alpha on test servers and I'm sure it will be a option when you build a server and run a map.

[Chuck_Owl]

So, good sirs (I feel dirty now) it transpires the OP, and his minions, already knew that server admins will be free to configure their own servers however they please.

 

It seems they are also fully versed in the facts regarding the state of the sim and the current servers being purely for testing.

 

Surely then they also realise the server's present configuration doesn't reflect a set-in-stone configuration.

 

So what was the essay for then?

 

Furious and Lucky certainly aren't my "minions" and we all have critical opinions of our own. Thank you very much, but I don't think we've reached that level of intellectual dishonesty yet.

Edited May 7, 2014 by 71st_AH_Chuck

[TJT]

So, good sirs (I feel dirty now) it transpires the OP, and his minions, already knew that server admins will be free to configure their own servers however they please.

 

It seems they are also fully versed in the facts regarding the state of the sim and the current servers being purely for testing.

 

Surely then they also realise the server's present configuration doesn't reflect a set-in-stone configuration.

 

So what was the essay for then?

 

A missguided feeling of them not being able to prepere to sealclub rather then being helpful for the games development?

[Chuck_Owl]

All right, this discussion is leading nowhere.

 

I've just had about enough of all this back-handed name-calling and sarcastic questioning of people's objectivity. If people can't have a rational discussion without taking everything so personal, I see no point in continuing this utterly pointless discussion.

Could a moderator please lock/delete this topic before some of us lose our temper? Thanks.

Edited May 7, 2014 by 71st_AH_Chuck

[FuriousFrog]

LOL, if you dont like it go elsewhere.

[FuriousFrog]

bully me out of the thread.

 

 

Seriously? at least you have a sense of humour.

[Chuck_Owl]

Funny thing is: Furious IS one of the leaders. Nice try.

[Bassly]

"Round will be ending in 5 minutes."

[Chuck_Owl]

I'm just a mindless drone. Carry on.

[FuriousFrog]

Didnt' notice a thing.. a coup? I must investigate.. Chuck you're fired

 

BTW - it's "won't" not "went". Don't they teach you anything down south? 

 

Edited! Nice work there Extreme

Edited May 7, 2014 by 71st_AH_Furious

[Chuck_Owl]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=75SEy1qu71I

 

No. YOU're fired. *bang*

Edited May 7, 2014 by 71st_AH_Chuck

[71st_AH_Lucky]

There are 3 likely reasons why it is present:

 

1.  they are testing it

2.  they need relatively equal numbers on both sides to test other things and they don't want to depend on us to do it voluntarily (mostly because we're not very dependable, as evidenced by the people who aren't playing because they don't want to be forced to fly something they don't want to fly)

3.  they're just fucking with us (also a perfectly valid reason)

 

I would not rule out any of those, and there are probably some that I haven't considered.

 

 

SirRobin,

 

Your second point is very valid and something I did not think of. As I said in my first reply to you, us simmers can be very picky, therefore, if the test they are carrying out is one that requires even numbers of players on both sides, it makes total sense to add the Team Balance feature, in order to get accurate data! 

 

Also... the third reason you gave cracked me up!

 

Cheers,

 

Jack

So, good sirs (I feel dirty now) it transpires the OP, and his minions, already knew that server admins will be free to configure their own servers however they please.

 

It seems they are also fully versed in the facts regarding the state of the sim and the current servers being purely for testing.

 

Surely then they also realise the server's present configuration doesn't reflect a set-in-stone configuration.

 

So what was the essay for then?

 

I think things are getting a little out of hand here...

 

I believe that the first post was not to debate the facts of what was currently in the sim, and what isn't,

 

I believe it was more of a question of why this feature is present at the current time and if we would be forced to use it or not in the final release.

 

That's all there is to it from what I can see,

 

Cheers,

[Bearcat]

Well this thread certainly took a turn for the surreal..