As a popular RO2 server admin, team auto balance is a negative not a positive. Most frequent complaint.
AUTOBALANCE: not a fan
- Thread starter a_gunslinger
- Start date
It is required thought for most servers. Getting people to switch teams is like drawing blood from an orange.
And as a server admin, couldn't you ask the owner to turn it off?
And as a server admin, couldn't you ask the owner to turn it off?
Possibly my mad. I was under impression it cant be turned off on server level that it was part of the new updates.
That, and I'm guessing you can change when AutoBalance would take place if you have it set (2 player difference, 3 player difference etc etc).
It should at least not pick leadership roles for autobalance (SL, TL). Nothing like having your entire team's momentum go to pot when your leader defects involuntarily.
I agree, its sadly a necessary evil.
I also agree with this, its especially irrataing after you mark artillery, get switched, and get like 20 team wounds.
I think the worst bit for me is getting switched near the end of the map.
Having slogged your way to the last cap and just about to win,some of the opposing team ragequit and you get switched.
Having slogged your way to the last cap and just about to win,some of the opposing team ragequit and you get switched.
Auto balance is actually one of the reasons I avoid the campaign mode. I pick one side, play a few rounds, my side begins wining (does not matter which), people start to switch to that side and then one or two maps before the end I get auto-balanced to the losers despite playing for about an hour-and-a-half and fulfilling the roles correctly.
I was looking for an answer to this, posted on 40-1. Thought that I would share the love:
"I had a quick look on the TWI forums but saw nothing about this most annoying phenomenon. So I thought that I would ask here as this is where I most often play.
Why do I get autobalanced to the other team in Campaign Mode so often? It really is quite frustrating, and doesn't seem to have much reason to it. As you probably know I play TL a lot (by default, due to lack of volunteers) and this can mean I lead the score table, yet next map I am flipped to the other team. I could be playing for 3-4 hours on one team, yet I am switched to the other team whether mine is winning or losing. Other times I have been switched several times. Surely players who are newly joined should be "autoed" ahead of me. This is what happens in other games.
Sorry to rant, just wondering if their is an answer and if it is fixable? "
"I had a quick look on the TWI forums but saw nothing about this most annoying phenomenon. So I thought that I would ask here as this is where I most often play.
Why do I get autobalanced to the other team in Campaign Mode so often? It really is quite frustrating, and doesn't seem to have much reason to it. As you probably know I play TL a lot (by default, due to lack of volunteers) and this can mean I lead the score table, yet next map I am flipped to the other team. I could be playing for 3-4 hours on one team, yet I am switched to the other team whether mine is winning or losing. Other times I have been switched several times. Surely players who are newly joined should be "autoed" ahead of me. This is what happens in other games.
Sorry to rant, just wondering if their is an answer and if it is fixable? "
I will put it this way: auto-balance is like a seat belt. You can argue that a seat belt sometimes takes a life but in the majority of cases it preserves it.
Auto balancing does it's fair share to keep the game fair. If you have less and less people on one team the enemy has less and less chicken to shoot which makes the game boring. Sometimes I change teams because I want more enemies I can kill.
Auto balancing does it's fair share to keep the game fair. If you have less and less people on one team the enemy has less and less chicken to shoot which makes the game boring. Sometimes I change teams because I want more enemies I can kill.
Autobalance is needed, but I would like to see the last team joiner will be switched no matter if he is still alive!
I really dislike it to get autoswitched in a game when I have fight really hard for te victory of the other side...
I really dislike it to get autoswitched in a game when I have fight really hard for te victory of the other side...
Perhaps it should only switch rifle class.
The admin has these options for auto balance.
A slight tangent but I would like to see some maps that are supposed to have a balance difference. Like a crazy defence map when one side has very good defensive position but less players. Perhaps the human players could be balanced but the attacker gets a bunch of crazy bots.
Might not work but I would like to see if first hand.
Defenders 32 humans Vs attackers 32 humans + 20 bots.
The admin has these options for auto balance.
A slight tangent but I would like to see some maps that are supposed to have a balance difference. Like a crazy defence map when one side has very good defensive position but less players. Perhaps the human players could be balanced but the attacker gets a bunch of crazy bots.
Might not work but I would like to see if first hand.
Defenders 32 humans Vs attackers 32 humans + 20 bots.
Attachments
Last edited:
Autobalance is the only thing currently preventing the Axis stacking being unbearable. It should not be removed at all costs.
Autobalance should actually be strengthened. It should default all servers to a maximum team difference of 1 (any more than 1 is fundamentally unfair).
Some even argue for forced auto team assign like insurgency. I like this approach because it means the teams are always fair and Axis stacking is eliminated.
However, the Axis-only players will be quick to come and post in this thread and argue against it so that they can preserve their unfair stacking behaviour, which is killing the game.
Autobalance should actually be strengthened. It should default all servers to a maximum team difference of 1 (any more than 1 is fundamentally unfair).
Some even argue for forced auto team assign like insurgency. I like this approach because it means the teams are always fair and Axis stacking is eliminated.
However, the Axis-only players will be quick to come and post in this thread and argue against it so that they can preserve their unfair stacking behaviour, which is killing the game.
It doesn't seem to matter which side I join, in the course of a campaign I will be flipped 2 or 3 times. Most annoying, especially if I have been playing TL for one team and no-one else has been willing to pick it up.
It also doesn't work either because most times I can jump right back even if its to play rifleman.
A better system needs to be implemented. As I said earlier in CoD2 servers it was always the "last in, first out" principle which I think is fairer.
It also doesn't work either because most times I can jump right back even if its to play rifleman.
A better system needs to be implemented. As I said earlier in CoD2 servers it was always the "last in, first out" principle which I think is fairer.
If the RO2 system doesn't already work by "last in, first out" then it should be changed to it immediately. This system is just so obvious - kids even use this in the school yard.
I'd love to hear how it actually works, as I often have the same experience. Play one side for 4-5 maps and get switched on the very last one.
Or play part of one and get switched. There seems to be no logic to it.
And, as was said, you can always immediately switch back which also doesn't make sense.
I also find it annoying that there's no notification, you are on one side seconds before the map starts and then when role selection comes up, you're on the other. "Waaait, what?"
Or play part of one and get switched. There seems to be no logic to it.
And, as was said, you can always immediately switch back which also doesn't make sense.
I also find it annoying that there's no notification, you are on one side seconds before the map starts and then when role selection comes up, you're on the other. "Waaait, what?"
I'd speculate that if auto balancing is needed, its the first person to die on the side with more players... seems that way anyway.
I recently purchased a private NFO server so that I could reduce the team balancing aspects. Three of us generally play together and we rarely get to join a game on the same side. Frequently, the first one of us killed gets flipped to the other side. While we only play against bots on our server, it allows us to learn maps together and to learn the game.
The server admin can 1) shut off team balancing completely, 2) can control if balancing occurs upon death, and 3) can set the maximum team difference.
If more servers had the balancing upon death turned off and had a team difference factor greater than 2 or 3, this would be less of a problem. I suspect the campaign balancing would still occur but it should happen less.
I did note that I was on a public server yesterday that appeared to have its settings in this fashion.
The server admin can 1) shut off team balancing completely, 2) can control if balancing occurs upon death, and 3) can set the maximum team difference.
If more servers had the balancing upon death turned off and had a team difference factor greater than 2 or 3, this would be less of a problem. I suspect the campaign balancing would still occur but it should happen less.
I did note that I was on a public server yesterday that appeared to have its settings in this fashion.