DUST Search - Suggestion: Team auto balancing

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

Laurent Cazaderon wrote:

KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote:

Necrodermis wrote:

this isn't team fortress.
you sign a contract to do a job, protect or defend.

once you sign you do that job.

once the game comes live I'm sure there will be tons of matches that are one sided. the eve player will give the contract the members that play dust will take it and then they will do it.

The excuse you provided only applies when we're hired by EVE players, who cares if its just for NPC contracts though?

"But also it might be worth considering having auto balancing during matches that aren't playing seriously (for districts or whatever)."
From the OP

TBH, just because contract is NPC seeded doesnt mean it's more ok to just switch side. This suggestion hits the core background of the game. To me, not a good idea.

It would be better of them to just work on their matchmaking system for those contracts.

Just make a lore explanation, like the enemy contractor offered you a better deal or something; we are greedy capitalists.
I like things to be consistent with logic and lore, but the quality of the gameplay is what should take priority. Balanced sides is very important to an enjoyable gameplay experience.
If matchmaking is improved like you suggested, then this won't be an issue at all. That would be the best case scenario.

Pages: [1] :: one page

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Bug1 Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 6	Posted - 2012.11.16 06:39:00 - [1] - Quote Just started a new game and it was 3v1 for the first few minutes, i didnt see anyone join and leave my team, was jsut me. It would have been better if the server had put 2 people on each team at the start. But also it might be worth considering having auto balancing during matches that aren't playing seriously (for districts or whatever).
Tectonious Falcon The Southern Legion 395	Posted - 2012.11.16 06:44:00 - [2] - Quote Auto balance is a must. No one enjoys getting stomped and it's not exactly fun stomping people either. Edit: I meant in High sec NPC games and in the beta. But then again I guess they do need to test balances between people running militia and people running proto.
Necrodermis GunFall Mobilization Covert Intervention 460	Posted - 2012.11.16 06:50:00 - [3] - Quote this isn't team fortress. you sign a contract to do a job, protect or defend. once you sign you do that job. once the game comes live I'm sure there will be tons of matches that are one sided. the eve player will give the contract the members that play dust will take it and then they will do it.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.11.16 07:33:00 - [4] - Quote Necrodermis wrote: this isn't team fortress. you sign a contract to do a job, protect or defend. once you sign you do that job. once the game comes live I'm sure there will be tons of matches that are one sided. the eve player will give the contract the members that play dust will take it and then they will do it. The excuse you provided only applies when we're hired by EVE players, who cares if its just for NPC contracts though? "But also it might be worth considering having auto balancing during matches that aren't playing seriously (for districts or whatever)." From the OP
Bendtner92 Imperfects Negative-Feedback 369	Posted - 2012.11.16 07:54:00 - [5] - Quote Bug1 wrote: It would have been better if the server had put 2 people on each team at the start. Or better yet if the server didn't start such empty matches in the first place. Edit: Also, was the 3 guys on the other team from the same corp? Because then they were in a squad, and you can't ask for them to be split up.
Laurent Cazaderon Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 1155	Posted - 2012.11.16 08:41:00 - [6] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Necrodermis wrote: this isn't team fortress. you sign a contract to do a job, protect or defend. once you sign you do that job. once the game comes live I'm sure there will be tons of matches that are one sided. the eve player will give the contract the members that play dust will take it and then they will do it. The excuse you provided only applies when we're hired by EVE players, who cares if its just for NPC contracts though? "But also it might be worth considering having auto balancing during matches that aren't playing seriously (for districts or whatever)." From the OP TBH, just because contract is NPC seeded doesnt mean it's more ok to just switch side. This suggestion hits the core background of the game. To me, not a good idea. It would be better of them to just work on their matchmaking system for those contracts.
KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf Seraphim Initiative. CRONOS. 3064	Posted - 2012.11.16 08:56:00 - [7] - Quote Laurent Cazaderon wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Necrodermis wrote: this isn't team fortress. you sign a contract to do a job, protect or defend. once you sign you do that job. once the game comes live I'm sure there will be tons of matches that are one sided. the eve player will give the contract the members that play dust will take it and then they will do it. The excuse you provided only applies when we're hired by EVE players, who cares if its just for NPC contracts though? "But also it might be worth considering having auto balancing during matches that aren't playing seriously (for districts or whatever)." From the OP TBH, just because contract is NPC seeded doesnt mean it's more ok to just switch side. This suggestion hits the core background of the game. To me, not a good idea. It would be better of them to just work on their matchmaking system for those contracts. Just make a lore explanation, like the enemy contractor offered you a better deal or something; we are greedy capitalists. I like things to be consistent with logic and lore, but the quality of the gameplay is what should take priority. Balanced sides is very important to an enjoyable gameplay experience. If matchmaking is improved like you suggested, then this won't be an issue at all. That would be the best case scenario.
Laurent Cazaderon Villore Sec Ops Gallente Federation 1155	Posted - 2012.11.16 09:01:00 - [8] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Laurent Cazaderon wrote: KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Necrodermis wrote: this isn't team fortress. you sign a contract to do a job, protect or defend. once you sign you do that job. once the game comes live I'm sure there will be tons of matches that are one sided. the eve player will give the contract the members that play dust will take it and then they will do it. The excuse you provided only applies when we're hired by EVE players, who cares if its just for NPC contracts though? "But also it might be worth considering having auto balancing during matches that aren't playing seriously (for districts or whatever)." From the OP TBH, just because contract is NPC seeded doesnt mean it's more ok to just switch side. This suggestion hits the core background of the game. To me, not a good idea. It would be better of them to just work on their matchmaking system for those contracts. Just make a lore explanation, like the enemy contractor offered you a better deal or something; we are greedy capitalists. I like things to be consistent with logic and lore, but the quality of the gameplay is what should take priority. Balanced sides is very important to an enjoyable gameplay experience. If matchmaking is improved like you suggested, then this won't be an issue at all. That would be the best case scenario. What happends if you're playing with a squad and get balanced out against your friend ? Not something i'd appreciate. Yet, i like your idea. If game is able to maintain pre-made squads and can switch you to the other side WITH an ISK bonus multiplier at the end of the game. It could be fun. But i'd rather have CCP working on matchmaking first. Yet i like that idea better now. What SHOULDNT be added though, is a possibility to manually switch team.
Bug1 Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 6	Posted - 2012.11.17 03:38:00 - [9] - Quote KAGEHOSHI Horned Wolf wrote: Just make a lore explanation, like the enemy contractor offered you a better deal or something; we are greedy capitalists. Or if the player to be team swaped is low scorer, then, your NPC contractor canceled your contract for being nub, the enemy NPC hired you for your inside knowledge.
Bug1 Tronhadar Free Guard Minmatar Republic 6	Posted - 2012.11.17 03:42:00 - [10] - Quote Laurent Cazaderon wrote: What happends if you're playing with a squad and get balanced out against your friend ? Not something i'd appreciate. Perhaps it could be made optional, with incentives; e.g. enemy NPC has offered to double your contract if you switch sides, do you accept ?

Ten-Sidhe Osmon Surveillance Caldari State 414	Posted - 2012.11.17 06:27:00 - [11] - Quote The switch offer sounds good, it should cause standing hit like quitting a mission in eve. Quitting match before end should lower standings as well. Standings, listed as soon in dust menu, determine how npc's view you. If you have low standings with a npc corp they won't let you take the better missions/contracts. Some npc services require a certain standing or higher with those npcs. This wouldn't affect player made contracts or corp matches, only npc contracts. It would give a incentive to more even teams, and give an incentive to not quick matches.
Taal'van Sanmatar Kelkoons Minmatar Republic 0	Posted - 2012.11.17 06:37:00 - [12] - Quote Necrodermis wrote: this isn't team fortress. you sign a contract to do a job, protect or defend. once you sign you do that job. once the game comes live I'm sure there will be tons of matches that are one sided. the eve player will give the contract the members that play dust will take it and then they will do it. /sarcasm I agree with this guy but friendly fire should be enabled so you can completely screw your contractor. You should also be able to hack the corporations bank account ect..Imagine how cool that would be!!!
Garrett Blacknova Codex Troopers 1849	Posted - 2012.11.17 07:21:00 - [13] - Quote Team auto-balancing SHOULD happen when you're first joining a match using the HighSec matchmaking system. Not for corp battles, not for player contracts. Not for player-selected NPC contracts. And more importantly, it shouldn't SWAP players from one team to another during the battle. If you search as a squad, you should be matched with as many players as you're bringing with you before the battle can start. The game shouldn't have 1 vs. 0 matches actually beginning without an opponent. Within the limit of one squad (4 players), there should be an allowable variance of 1 player between teams, so if there are 3 people queued together, they won't go into battle against less than 2 enemies.


Pages: [1] :: one page
First page \| Previous page \| Next page \| Last page