I agree that you could run into anything, but in an even fight somewhere in the system shouldn’t be weighted to one side or the other just because team A happens to have less players and does more damage. I wasn’t talking about fights where maybe it’s uneven. And! In that case it would be even more cause for disparity if I have a ship that does +30% damage and I’m able to kill 3 other bogeys doing normal damage where I still win. That’s ridiculous.
Only if you were an expert pilot against noob to average pilots should that be the case - and not at all the case because you instantly get +% damage. What’s stopping me from always joining the team with less players and only hunt newer/lone players because I can kill them easily, then leave the game as soon as the teams are balanced because I don’t have my damage bonus? Nothing. All it brings is really bad tactics.
If I remember correctly, there is also a general score in Battlefiled’s stats. This score gets better if you play your role (resurrect / heal as a medic, give ammo as support, etc.) and it includes holding / defending a point.
Stats are here to be useful in some way: either make a decision out of it, or see how you fared lately or decide if you should recruit this new guy in your clan. If no one gets anything useful from your stats, then they are either computed incompletely or the collected data is not sufficent / useful.
This is why LoL included assists compared to the original DotA, and gives even more info at game’s end (ward placed / gold difference / …).
Some stats should be available at the end of the arena / battle, other should be more personnal and not shown unless you make it public on your personnal profile, IMO.
The leaver scenario is a serious question to tackle. When speaking about a ranked game, it has not been solved to my knowledge as there are many pros and cons for both sides. So far, punishing the leaver with an extra wait time, or whatever penalty, for his next game, is one of the few neutral ground applied that I know of.
Nonetheless, I agree with you @Skyentist: giving an advantage to a team with a leaver should be carefully calculated.
To be frank - that is a terrible idea. It’s too easy to be exploited (all on your team leaves except you, after some minutes you’ll be a flying behemoth who can easily take out guarded high cost ships of the enemy with a starter ship in seconds), and even without exploiting, it is too much of a balance problem. On one hand you won’t be able to measure up the enemies strength and won’t be able to tell, if you should flee or fight. At least not based on the ship the enemy is flying. On the other hand giving someone a 2x gear buff also means that the other (unbuffed) one will be more at a disadvantage than fighting against two ships. If he’s fighting against two ships, both enemy ships have to manually aim and hit him, and he can mark one of the ships and concentrate all fire on it, to ease the burden on his ship after destroying one of the two enemy ships. Fighting against one ship with a 2x modificator means, that he keeps getting double damage, even though he has dealt enough damage to destroy one unbuffed ship.
I disagree whole heartedly with boosting/reducing stats based on team player count. That being said, there’s plenty of other ways to balance without impacting combat stats. Capture speed, build speed, ship cost, respawn timer, NPC ship count, etc.
I strongly, strongly recommend both balancing the overarching war, and never, ever touching ship balance.
The system is weighted to make up for the unfairness of numerical disadvantage. It’s not supposed to make supermen out of the inferior force, just bring them up to a comparable level. Beyond that, it’s a question of fate as to whether you get a 1v1 fight.
Well, stop creating ridiculous scenarios and it’ll work better
I really think that you’re tilting at windmills. You don’t want the system to unbalance gameplay and produce all these terrible incomes, and it’ll only do that if it’s done wrong - just like any other system that needs tuning. shrug
Teams will never be truly balanced. There will always be a group or just this one guy that is above average and make one team win, it also can’t always be a close call, that wouldn’t be interesting either, sometimes overcoming that one good guy can be fun too.
Competitive games in the past, especially those where the players stay on the server after the round ends, show that team balance shifts pretty fast, usually about thirty minutes to one hour. After that time the team balance will be completely different again as players leave and join and get auto designated. If there is a bigger imbalance it will get corrected by the usual auto balance feature.
Oh and if you are just talking about numerical difference … I think it’s even less of a problem, don’t alow for it on official servers. A lot of games force balance teams. Some more intelligently then others. If you play on a community server with balance of, you have to ask nicely or accept to fight with a handicap, which can be a plus if you like challenges.
Concerning Stats, I think the stats that are used for competitive games and players have shown to be the most robust and useful when it comes to determining a players skill. I’m sure there is a controversy, as those groups won’t just accept a computer judging their skill, but with thousands of players, finding an algorithm that works can be really beneficial where the statement I posted above (a match can’t always be balanced) is unacceptable by the players and the audience. They want to fight and see players on the same level. Couter Strike: Global Offensive and Forged Alliance Forever come to mind.
In the board game Axis and Allies the Allies nearly always win. To counter this even in conventions money is bid to give to the Axis side.
It seems like that may be possible in I:B. Like giving one side more hit points on there space base.
Isn’t that devaluing the benefits afforded to developer level backers? That level of pledge wasn’t cheap and the main reason for making that commitment was to have close contact with you guys and be directly involved in the development of the game.
Well, transparent development is most useful when there’s at least something to work on.
They can’t listen to all comments since everybody will have different opinions on what a game should be (just watch me and @JB47394 have a discussion ^^).
Knowing that Alpha is where the first gameplay elements are released and most of the GUI / graphic assets are available, it makes sense to me that the Devs want to wait until that release.
If that can make you feel better, the high-end pledger will be the first to be heard / taken into consideration. At least I hope so ^^
Yeah now that I’m thinking about I don’t see why we won’t be able to have weekly scheduled playtests before the Alpha is released. I’ve been in a bit of a fog all week.
So, I did browse the website and opened the “Blog” page. ( http://inovaekeith.blogspot.com/ )
Noticing the last entry being from August 2015 did certainly not increase my confidence about this product.
May I recommend to finish up the blog and refer any and all viewers to the forum?
Yeah that’s pretty much what happened. All the time I would have spent on blogging I now spend on weekly updates . The blog is actually no longer linked from the website for that reason however Google still points to the old site from its search results. @Dwarfie how did you get to the blog?
. The blog is actually no longer linked from the website for that reason however Google still points to the old site from its search results. 