Balance Balance during large games

[des1206]

The April 1st games were fun and filled with large number of players. It doesn't happen often, but how do we feel about overall game balance and strategy changes when a large number of players (30+) fill up the game? I would think the increase in number of players will make stealth play/flanking by lone RJ/arties/phase much harder (since enemies fill up the map), give a bonus to group support units like the mobile GAP/medic/mechanic/APC, and maybe tanya will be less successful in C4ing (given how 1 C4 is needed per MCT but there are more defenders)?

 

 

[JigglyJie]

I always felt something similar akin to this: Allies work well in lesser numbers; whereas Soviets work well in greater numbers.

 

But realistically, balance goes out the window the more players there are and I personally feel that's fine, it means you must work as a team instead of being a lone wolf all the time. It is true that stealth and flanking are less successful when up against such a numerous opposition, providing scouts are in place but that all adds to the fun, I feel.

[Pushwall]

Pretty much what Jie said. Allies do have the means to win big games, but usually they have to act fast to do so, leveraging their cheaper faster units at a point where the economy is still really important. Spy shenanigans can help since the more players there are, the harder it becomes to keep track of them.

Balancing around all kinds of player counts is really finicky in a game like this where both teams have vastly different units and playstyles. As long as the pendulum doesn't swing too far in one team's favour it should be fine.

[OrangeP47]

Despite the large games, a few times as allies we still managed to pull off some good tactics and stealth. The key was communication. Phases vs HTs were particularly and surprisingly effective one round on Bonzai. Half the team stayed back to slow the rush, other half hit the HTs from behind as soon as they were distracted, rushes were over pretty much as soon as they began.

[Raap]

14 hours ago, Pushwall said:

Pretty much what Jie said. Allies do have the means to win big games, but usually they have to act fast to do so, leveraging their cheaper faster units at a point where the economy is still really important. Spy shenanigans can help since the more players there are, the harder it becomes to keep track of them.

Balancing around all kinds of player counts is really finicky in a game like this where both teams have vastly different units and playstyles. As long as the pendulum doesn't swing too far in one team's favour it should be fine.

 

Fortunately the door to population scale based balancing seems to have been opened. If a clear signal is given that Soviets consistently win matches in 20+ player servers using, for example, coordinated Mammoth Tank assaults, then you can say if the server reaches 10 Soviet players, Mammoth Tanks get 10% less health, and 15% less at 15 Soviet players, and 20% less at 20 Soviet players. Perhaps an easier "global balance adjustments" script can be created to more easily manage this by loading separate ini files based on certain population thresholds, rather than updating each preset manually.

But then again I generally am a strong believer in scaling content in general, and I think the more you use of it, the better adapted W3D games can play in any population scenario.

[des1206]

5 hours ago, Raap said:

 

Fortunately the door to population scale based balancing seems to have been opened. If a clear signal is given that Soviets consistently win matches in 20+ player servers using, for example, coordinated Mammoth Tank assaults, then you can say if the server reaches 10 Soviet players, Mammoth Tanks get 10% less health, and 15% less at 15 Soviet players, and 20% less at 20 Soviet players. Perhaps an easier "global balance adjustments" script can be created to more easily manage this by loading separate ini files based on certain population thresholds, rather than updating each preset manually.

But then again I generally am a strong believer in scaling content in general, and I think the more you use of it, the better adapted W3D games can play in any population scenario.

 

No, no, no. That's just the lazy man's way of balancing!

I do wonder if there is more potential for a large Allied team if they only coordinated better via mic. Maybe it's not that Allies are worse off in larger games, it's just that it's harder for them to play a coordinated game which can unlock more of their potential.

[OrangeP47]

3 hours ago, des1206 said:

No, no, no. That's just the lazy man's way of balancing!

I do wonder if there is more potential for a large Allied team if they only coordinated better via mic. Maybe it's not that Allies are worse off in larger games, it's just that it's harder for them to play a coordinated game which can unlock more of their potential.

I think it's more that allied strategies are less obvious. It's easy for someone to tell everyone to buy a tank and ask the team follow. A tank is a point and shoot weapon. Allied tanks are less powerful, so you have to mix it up, use advanced units, and advanced units are harder to use. It's a lot harder to get the team to split into a hammer and shield force and catch an incoming rush in the flank. It's not really a unit problem, but a player skill problem. Don't get me wrong, I'm not *blaming* the players, that's just how skill works. It should be like a universal effect over all players, regardless of what their 'general' skill level is.

I don't think mics are a viable solution, because not everyone has one, some people lag too much to be understandable, so people just always turn it off because they don't like randos talking to them, etc. I guess at the core of the argument we kind of agree, but I don't think there's any kind of 'leveler' that can be applied to the allies to help with that coordination.

[Raap]

On 13-4-2017 at 2:53 AM, DoMiNaNt_HuNtEr said:

Naw, mammoths getting nerfed ain't the solution. Allies needing field control is the only solution. People with this game half the time ain't familiar with Renegade, and in Renegade? its ALL ABOUT FIELD CONTROL. The Allies have the speed to keep the Soviets stuck inside of their base.

Note the highlighted part you missed in your quote; for example.

I didn't comment on actual balance, I simply brought up a new method of balancing high population issues that don't exist in low population matches. 

Edited April 15, 2017 by Raap