Free Allegiance Forums

...losing doesn't necessarily mean that the system is broken. One side is going to lose every time. The real question is, did you have an even chance of winning.

Regarding when should ab be turned, I agree with you. There probably is a point at which it doesn't have a large enough player base to balance adequately. I think 10 v 10 is the outer limits, but theoretically, even 5 v 5 should balance just fine. The reason it gets a little dicey is that one 10 might be able to whore another 10 every time. Therefore in a small game, ab would produce a false balance. Equally, one 10 might be able to HTT well, another not. In a small game, that discrepency might be the difference between winning and losing. Depending on the tech path, the teams might not be truly balanced.

But these are exactly the kind of questions that can't be answered and FIXED until the system is used on a regular basis.

Yes, I think it's going to produce some spectacularly crappy games, but as with core balancing, we are all used to it, we all accept that cores go through balancing times and I think we should offer autobalance the same sort of leniency and acceptance.

Ksero wrote:QUOTE (Ksero @ Apr 18 2007, 06:08 PM) Spidey, are you talking about the bugs that are present in the current implementation of auto-balance? Because those bugs can and will be fixed. If you're not talking about the bugs, could you clarify your arguments on why AB sucks?

Other than the fact it places you into a team and faction you may not want to play. Removing choice from Allegiance.

apochboi wrote:QUOTE (apochboi @ Apr 18 2007, 07:11 PM) Other than the fact it places you into a team and faction you may not want to play. Removing choice from Allegiance.

Remove all techtrees from allegiance, exept one. Remove all factions from allegiance, exept one. Remove callsigns. You will have a 100% balanced boring game.

apochboi wrote:QUOTE (apochboi @ Apr 18 2007, 07:11 PM) Other than the fact it places you into a team and faction you may not want to play. Removing choice from Allegiance.

Without auto-balance, if you want to fly for blue and they're up one pilot, you have to wait until someone joins yellow before you can join the team of your choice. With auto-balance, you have to wait until enough pilots have joined yellow so the helo is approximately even before you join blue... But you can still fly for the side you prefer.
How does this remove choice from Allegiance?

Apoch there is a difference betwen AB being turned on and an AB flush, but then again you probably already know that. I've only seen AB flush used seriously in the anniversary game. Autobalance On doesn't take away choice any more than a stacked team takes away the choice of an unstacked team wanting an evenly matched game.

Balance games, retain newbies who aren't whored relentlessly.

The problem of lack of choice in the game is because of our small playerbase -- increase and retain the playerbase and you will have a multitude of games to choose from and one of them will likely have a tolerable comm/faction AND be balanced.

Its funny that some of you use the ill-effects of stacking as an excuse for not changing the institution of stacking.

Ksero wrote:QUOTE (Ksero @ Apr 18 2007, 06:26 PM) Without auto-balance, if you want to fly for blue and they're up one pilot, you have to wait until someone joins yellow before you can join the team of your choice. With auto-balance, you have to wait until enough pilots have joined yellow so the helo is approximately even before you join blue... But you can still fly for the side you prefer.
How does this remove choice from Allegiance?

The game could potentially end, before I get the chance to join.

apochboi wrote:QUOTE (apochboi @ Apr 18 2007, 07:49 PM) The game could potentially end, before I get the chance to join.

That happens without auto-balance as well. It's the price you pay for being choosy/picky.

My reasoning for why I hate AB (99.9% of my hate is directed toward small games) is that oft times having a greater number of players is a bigger advantage than being up 15 helo which is in fact not balance at all but a stack to the team that is up 3 players.

AB should only be used in large games to to actually get it to work you need someone who is smart with GC who can flip it on and off as the game progresses and grows.

It also sucks for those of high rank because If I could get Aarm or say 8 of CoD or KGJV for that price I'm much more likely to accept the lower rank more numberous players thus denying the higher ranked players a chance to play.

And of course there aer some clear cut instances of AB denying people choice.

I shouldnt say I hate AB but the way its used really needs to be evaluated closer IMO

spidey has a good point here.

Any sensible comm would talk say ... 2 (9) instead of an (18).

Also, people who antistack regularly and therefore have low ranks are actually going to end up stacking against each other with AB turned on.

The only way I can see to solve this problem is to make people play with AB on and eventually, when the ranks balance out after a while it'll start to work. But that's gonna be a long and painful process.