autobalance system abuse

creamcream Join Date: 2011-05-14 Member: 98671Members
<div class="IPBDescription">please disable and fix</div>the current autobalance system can be abused to win games, even if done unintentionally. i just finished a game where players f4-ed to readyroom, blocking the other (winning) team from spawning and making them lose the game.

an example:

on a 16p server, there are 4 exos, 3 marines, 1 commander. aliens have 1 onos and 7 other lifeforms which are not onos. 4 exos are just outside the last alien hive. the lone onos goes from the other direction and hits marine spawn, killing the 3 marines (who just got distressed back) without exos. 1 by 1 the other alien players go back to readyroom while the remaining few delay the exos from killing the hive. the autobalance system kicks in, so the 3 dead marines can't spawn. the onos finishes off the power node in marine spawn, kills the cc (and the commander), then the other alien players join back in to finish off the remaining exos to win the game.

a little exaggeration on my part and hard to do it correctly if the other team knows what you're doing, but it's clear that the current autobalance system can be exploited to win games, sometimes even unintentionally (since some players f4 when they think they're losing).

the logic behind the system is right, but the spawn penalty affects the game drastically to the point that a team that already has a 90% chance of winning can lose by people going to the readyroom. that is not right.

i think you should disable the autobalance system for now, especially on your official servers. it may suck for people who hate stackers, but i think that's a much safer choice until you can come up with a better solution for balancing teams.

Comments

  • ItAxItAx Join Date: 2012-08-08 Member: 155046Members
    edited November 2012
    I think that only 1 marine of those 3 can't spawn.
    Am I wrong?
  • creamcream Join Date: 2011-05-14 Member: 98671Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2009610:date=Nov 4 2012, 10:33 PM:name=ItAx)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ItAx @ Nov 4 2012, 10:33 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2009610"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I think that only 1 marine of those 3 can't spawn.
    Am I wrong?<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    it depends on the difference in number of players.

    e.g. 8 marines vs 4 aliens, then 3 marines won't be able to spawn.
  • Omega_K2Omega_K2 Join Date: 2011-12-25 Member: 139013Members, Reinforced - Shadow
    Yeah the autobalance system is bull######. It should be gone for good until it is reworked.

    All it does right now is extending already lost games instead of "balancing" them.
  • douchebagatrondouchebagatron Custom member title Join Date: 2003-12-20 Member: 24581Members, Constellation, Reinforced - Shadow
    edited November 2012
    There's a separate system for auto-concede which should've kicked in in that situation. could've been that not enough people f4'd or the server has the threshold too high for it to kick in.

    I'm a big fan of the auto-balance system as it is now. Probably could be altered to still allow a +1 difference or something in spawning, instead of keeping it even. Or add a longer delay until the system kicks in.
  • nsguynsguy Join Date: 2010-01-03 Member: 69869Members
    edited November 2012
    I get frustrated with the team-balancing system because I refuse to change team after fighting for 40 minutes. Given the scenario you gave above, the system makes sense - it balanced the teams and you lost. But I think it <!--coloro:#F4A460--><span style="color:#F4A460"><!--/coloro-->should take into consideration the length of time someone has been playing when deciding who can and can't spawn<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->!

    It would also be a nice idea to allow servers to disable it.
  • creamcream Join Date: 2011-05-14 Member: 98671Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2009708:date=Nov 5 2012, 12:07 AM:name=Omega_K2)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Omega_K2 @ Nov 5 2012, 12:07 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2009708"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Yeah the autobalance system is bull######. It should be gone for good until it is reworked.

    All it does right now is extending already lost games instead of "balancing" them.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    what you said is true, but the problem here is that it allows the losing team to flip tables in some situations without even "playing" the game (f4 to handicap opposite team anyone?).


    <!--quoteo(post=2009710:date=Nov 5 2012, 12:10 AM:name=6john)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (6john @ Nov 5 2012, 12:10 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2009710"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->There's a separate system for auto-concede which should've kicked in in that situation. could've been that not enough people f4'd or the server has the threshold too high for it to kick in.

    I'm a big fan of the auto-balance system as it is now. Probably could be altered to still allow a +1 difference or something in spawning, instead of keeping it even. Or add a longer delay until the system kicks in.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    on UWE's official servers, even when it's 8 vs 0, the game does not end until the objectives are met (hives/ccs destroyed).

    at the moment there is already a +1 difference, but it's not enough, judging from what happened in my experience. personally, i think this system is kinda half-assed (couldn't think of a better word, sorry). jamming up spawn queues isn't the solution i think.

    <!--quoteo(post=2009724:date=Nov 5 2012, 12:16 AM:name=nsguy)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (nsguy @ Nov 5 2012, 12:16 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2009724"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I get frustrated with the team-balancing system because I refuse to change team after fighting for 40 minutes. Given the scenario you gave above, the system makes sense - it balanced the teams and you lost. But I think it <!--coloro:#F4A460--><span style="color:#F4A460"><!--/coloro-->should take into consideration the length of time someone has been playing when deciding who can and can't spawn<!--colorc--></span><!--/colorc-->!

    It would also be a nice idea to allow servers to disable it.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    the problem here is that it can be exploited by the losing team to take advantage of certain situations (e.g. all exos alive, away from marine spawn/expansions, with all non-exos in spawn queue), which was what resulted in marines losing in my example. in one such game, the aliens didn't even expect to win. they f4'd because they thought they lost, but turns out it completely handicaps the marine team by preventing non-exos from spawning, albeit unintentionally.

    i, however, do agree with your suggestions to take length of play into account and allow servers to disable it, as much as i disapprove of the current autobalance system and want it removed.

    please UWE, disable it on your official servers at least (since nobody has control over them), and come up with a more elegant solution that won't cause such drastic changes to the flow of the game.
  • ChaosXBeingChaosXBeing Join Date: 2012-10-12 Member: 162114Members
    What kind of solution do you propose?

    If you were using this example to ask for a new feature, like a 'vote surrender' for example, it might be a compelling argument. But if all you're asking for is for a feature to be removed with nothing else to replace it - a feature that prevents a terrible problem at that - you'll probably never get anywhere.


    Think of it this way: Which do you think is more likely? People complaining about being on a 3V10 game, or the very few who will complain about the very difficult to abuse balance system?


    As a side note, it's never a good idea to have a whole team of Exos. Even for a hive push. As marine com, I always tell everyone that we should have 3, max, even in a large scale game. In a small game, maybe only 2. Otherwise, we're just too vulnerable.
  • creamcream Join Date: 2011-05-14 Member: 98671Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2010188:date=Nov 5 2012, 06:13 AM:name=ChaosXBeing)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (ChaosXBeing @ Nov 5 2012, 06:13 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2010188"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->What kind of solution do you propose?

    If you were using this example to ask for a new feature, like a 'vote surrender' for example, it might be a compelling argument. But if all you're asking for is for a feature to be removed with nothing else to replace it - a feature that prevents a terrible problem at that - you'll probably never get anywhere.


    Think of it this way: Which do you think is more likely? People complaining about being on a 3V10 game, or the very few who will complain about the very difficult to abuse balance system?


    As a side note, it's never a good idea to have a whole team of Exos. Even for a hive push. As marine com, I always tell everyone that we should have 3, max, even in a large scale game. In a small game, maybe only 2. Otherwise, we're just too vulnerable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    what terrible problem? stacking is not a terrible problem. this is, because it changes the flow of the game by people f4ing. i have said before that the logic behind the system is right, it's just the implementation that is not successful enough. you'd think they would've implemented auto-concede as well, but turns out even when the entire team f4s, the opposite team still has to finish off the game before it ends. this is on their official servers, mind you.

    the only time i ever saw people complained (other than in this situation where some f4'd and totally flipped the game over in a matter of seconds) was when they saw ns1 vets joining the same team at the start of the game. you can't rambo as marine in ns2, nor can you bunnyhop as skulk to wtf-pwn noob marines, so people play because they have a chance and only f4 when they think they're close to losing. nobody f4s and makes it "3 vs 10" until they're sure they've lost and even then nobody complains about it... until this situation happens.

    but of course, i speak only for players i've seen on UWE asia servers. i guess we like putting up a fight before we go down?

    as for your side note, i did say it was exaggeration on my part, and 4 exos != full team with 8 players. i guess that renders it irrelevant?

    while my opinion is to have it removed, that's not what i'm asking for. i just want it disabled on UWE official servers (or at least asia's) until they can come up with a more elegant solution. i'll even settle for auto-concede/surrender/anything else at this moment. i won't come up with my own system because i came from the age of ns1 where i got stacked against until i became good (no form of autobalance system back in ns1). i can tell you why i think stacking is good for n00bs to toughen up and learn at a much quicker pace but that's another topic for another time.

    else i say, wait for this abuse to get to your region of play. we'll see how that goes.
  • SanCoSanCo Join Date: 2012-08-18 Member: 155744Members
    edited November 2012
    <!--quoteo(post=2010745:date=Nov 5 2012, 07:34 AM:name=cream)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (cream @ Nov 5 2012, 07:34 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2010745"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->i have said before that the logic behind the system is right, it's just the implementation that is not successful enough. you'd think they would've <b>implemented auto-concede</b> as well, but turns out even when the entire team f4s, the opposite team still has to finish off the game before it ends. this is on their official servers, mind you.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    Are you drunk? =) I don't know how many games I've been winning early because of ragequits before all the people in ready-room are slow to join and then 2 guys disconnect / f4 when they notice ppl aren't joining, giving my team auto-win because there is a 50% ratio for auto-concede (double player on none-raging team). There is an auto-concede, maybe not on those server you are playing. Myself I don't remember if it was on offical or private servers, so not sure what the default option is.
  • creamcream Join Date: 2011-05-14 Member: 98671Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2010983:date=Nov 5 2012, 09:15 PM:name=SanCo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (SanCo @ Nov 5 2012, 09:15 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2010983"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Are you drunk? =) I don't know how many games I've been winning early because of ragequits before all the people in ready-room are slow to join and then 2 guys disconnect / f4 when they notice ppl aren't joining, giving my team auto-win because there is a 50% ratio for auto-concede (double player on none-raging team). <b>There is an auto-concede, maybe not on those server you are playing.</b> Myself I don't remember if it was on offical or private servers, so not sure what the default option is.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    not drunk =)

    those servers i'm playing on are <u><b>UWE official servers</b></u> asia, so either the default option is no auto-concede or it isn't implemented. what would you have thought after several games with 8 vs 0 that don't end?

    suppose i can trust what you're saying about auto-concede being implemented, then yeah UWE forgot to turn it on for their own servers. isn't that odd considering its their own game and their own servers that they're running?

    i think that counts as a massive screw-up on their part.
  • TwixitTwixit Join Date: 2012-11-05 Member: 167120Members
    Sry guys, but I have to say this is a whine thread!

    Tell me how often this scenario happens.
  • IeptBarakatIeptBarakat The most difficult name to speak ingame. Join Date: 2009-07-10 Member: 68107Members, Constellation, NS2 Playtester, Squad Five Blue, NS2 Map Tester, Reinforced - Diamond, Reinforced - Shadow
    I know I abused it once before, although it was in a combat mod server so it didn't make much of a difference.
  • creamcream Join Date: 2011-05-14 Member: 98671Members
    <!--quoteo(post=2011068:date=Nov 5 2012, 10:24 PM:name=Twixit)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Twixit @ Nov 5 2012, 10:24 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=2011068"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Sry guys, but I have to say this is a whine thread!

    Tell me how often this scenario happens.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->

    not a whine thread if i'm pointing out problems in the autobalance system that can be abused.

    how often? seriously? how about often enough to warrant a thread?

    a lot of people have warned me about coming to this forum. please don't prove them right.
Sign In or Register to comment.