bs team sign up overruns bs lvl ranges

[WC_]

As you see there, the queue IS letting more people from one side in than for the other.

It is less important that they are letting more people in on one side, and much more important that they KNOWINGLY do so, by design. Reworded, as I would have chosen ...

As you see there, the queue IS KNOWINGLY letting more people from one side in than for the other.

It is THAT fact I find the most disheartening. It appears that no real PvP'ers are in the design decision-making position at FC on the AO project. FC is saying that by design and intent, they are choosing to violate the very first rule in "capture the flag" scenario designs, that everyone else uses in game design to make the scenario fun.

It's like that Seinfeld episode, where George Costanza needed someone to purchase calzones from a particular food stand he was banned from, so that he could continue having lunch with George Steinbrenner. He hired Newman the chubby mailman to buy them for him everyday, since Newman also stopped by there everyday. The day came where it was raining out, and Newman informed George he wasn't going to buy calzones for him that day because he didn't deliever mail on rain days. Exasperated, George started recounting the Mailman's motto ... "Neither rain, nor sleet, nor snow ... ". He stops himself, and in complete disbelief, he states "It's the first one!"

All I can say to Funcom at this point, is .. "It's the first one!". *slaps forehead*

At some point, unless FC finally decides to make these BS battles 1:1, I would end up favoring removing all pretense of even-sided battles. Just remove the queue from the BS completely, and allow all to join in on every fight, just as if the BS isn't instanced in a separate playfield. This would at least remove the frustration factor of all that really wanted and expected a fun PvP area in AO, and we can all stop trying to get one created. The BS area would then be transformed into a very fast VP farming area, where clan and omni would cooperate, allowing alternating turns of 4 flag captures with 2 second 5-point ticks taking 100 seconds to complete. With 3 minutes between battlestations, 100 seconds to tick 500, and 20 seconds to do the captures and re-sign up, everyone could at least farm over 1k VP's every 10 minutes. (5 minutes for each battle, alternating 500-0 wins)

Or Funcom could get the message and make the freakin' sides guaranteed equal every battle.

[Boltgun]

Thats a little more complex. There are two factors there, firstly the one we can't really help in the shape of people leaving mid battle. We don't really want to go down the road of kicking people from a battlestation which would really be our only alternative on that one.

Bah kick players out of the BS level range they know well if they are going in a 210-220 one when not allowed.

[Ithnag]

Originally Posted by Silirrion
Thats a little more complex. There are two factors there, firstly the one we can't really help in the shape of people leaving mid battle. We don't really want to go down the road of kicking people from a battlestation which would really be our only alternative on that one.

The real alternative there is that the queue shouldn't let more people from the side with higher numbers go in until the numbers get even again (and i stress the "again" cause in NO way it can work if the queue allows anything but 1:1 people to enter the BS) either by people joining the other side or by people leaving the BS from the side with higher numbers 8by LD/crash or simply leaving.)

[CarbonumCopy]

The real alternative there is that the queue shouldn't let more people from the side with higher numbers go in until the numbers get even again (and i stress the "again" cause in NO way it can work if the queue allows anything but 1:1 people to enter the BS) either by people joining the other side or by people leaving the BS from the side with higher numbers 8by LD/crash or simply leaving.)

So how do you address the problem of long waits in the queue? Ensuring a 1:1 all the time isn't the cure-all you seem to think it is.

[Ithnag]

you rather want the option of having uneven sides in the BS? what't the point in going in if there's gonna be 15 vs 25?. That scenario (1:1) it's the only way any real PvP can go on inside. Any other than 1:1 and you should better your give the VP and all for free, no need to frustrate one side or the other.

make another instance, one where you can play team Vs team instead of as factions, give other options, but really don't do anything that is not 1:1 cause it will simply not work.

You think that waiting as of now could be bad, what when people really get completley fed up of being slaughtered by 2x their numbers in there?, is one side stops showing up then theres no BS for anyone.

Capture the flag scenario as a 1:1 thing is not just my idea, it's how every single game and player of such a scenario work and should work.

Edit: such other instance should allow only for team invites, would give the chance to 12 new players to have BS action. problem as of now it's that their team sign in is not working properly. But sincerely in a PvP scenario like this, ensuring even numbers is more important than waiting times.

[atlasdreamer]

Not to fan the flames so to speak but:

WHat are these Capture the flag senarios you speak of? that ONLY allow for even sides?

In every game that had that Option as a combat senario the sides would not nessesarily be even but have a 1-2 person leeway.
One fight your team might have 6 men while the other team has only 5.
The methods used to balance senarios in other games wouldnt work simply becuase if you had 6 and 4 on a team respectively , other games take the extra man from one team and add him to the smaller team. I dont really see that working properly as it would result in an Omni on the Clan team or vice versa.
the Other method would involve alot of potential problems.
The first of which is creating a holding area for both teams untill they are even and active. possibly with a swtich that has to be hit by each member of the team before the doors to BS could open. and you will STILL end up with one team or another being out numbered if some jackhole takes the altF4 route or LD's and doesnt come back or any number of other possible senarios.
Finally after a preset number of VP is reached the entire instance would need to be purged so that the process of creating teams can start all over again.

This isnt an FPS in which team vs team balance is built right into the codeing.
this is modifying 7 year old code to make it work in a manner that is somewhat consistent and at least has a nod at the concept of "fair fight"

[CarbonumCopy]

Well, I've made some other suggestions. Maybe not the perfect solution, but simply demanding that it be 1:1 all the time, while not addressing the problems of queue waits, kickouts, failed BS startups, level ranges with no BS activity, and other problems with the current setup isn't contributing much.

I don't think anyone would argue against balanced sides being better than unbalanced sides. So how do you get as close as possible to that without causing/aggravating other problems? Problems that I think a lot of other players feel strongly about.

And personally, I don't think small imbalances in side numbers are intolerable. Note I said small, not the extreme cases like 2:1. Especially if those imbalances arise through players on one side declining invites, leaving, or title hugging. Nothing wrong with that being a temporary penalty to their side, in my view.

[Ithnag]

Not to fan the flames so to speak but:

WHat are these Capture the flag senarios you speak of? that ONLY allow for even sides?

In every game that had that Option as a combat senario the sides would not nessesarily be even but have a 1-2 person leeway.
One fight your team might have 6 men while the other team has only 5.
The methods used to balance senarios in other games wouldnt work simply becuase if you had 6 and 4 on a team respectively , other games take the extra man from one team and add him to the smaller team. I dont really see that working properly as it would result in an Omni on the Clan team or vice versa.
the Other method would involve alot of potential problems.
The first of which is creating a holding area for both teams untill they are even and active. possibly with a swtich that has to be hit by each member of the team before the doors to BS could open. and you will STILL end up with one team or another being out numbered if some jackhole takes the altF4 route or LD's and doesnt come back or any number of other possible senarios.
Finally after a preset number of VP is reached the entire instance would need to be purged so that the process of creating teams can start all over again.

This isnt an FPS in which team vs team balance is built right into the codeing.
this is modifying 7 year old code to make it work in a manner that is somewhat consistent and at least has a nod at the concept of "fair fight"

5 vs 4 is not what we are talking about, i've also not suggested at all that kicking people is the way.
15 vs 25 IS an issue, and in a situation where there was no LD, crash or people leaving the area from the outnumbered side it's a graphicall show of how bad the queue invites can be a serious problem.

Any capture the flag game evens out the sides in game as much as posible, and unless you play with some sort of handicap, the diference is never more than 1 or 2.

alt-f4 is a problem, and not responsability of FC, but the system "being too leanient" in the diference of people that allows t enter do is a problem from start, read what Sil posted, it was designed that way (probably to reduce wait times in the bigger queue area) and that is a proble.

Join to any good game that has a capture the flag scenario and you'll see that by default you'll be placed on the side with fewer numbers, join a tournament and you'll see they require even numbers.

having an instance to join as teams instead of faction could solve the waiting problem, franckly don't know waht could FC do about lower level BS when people don't show up, but i assure you that if people shows up and one side ends up with more numbers than the other and crush them chances are next time fewer people will show up for the losing side and will contribute to perpetuate the no BS for lowbies situation.

Merge BS among servers, allow for inter server faction wars on instances, or server vs server, but really the solution is not letting the queue to invite more people form one side than the other, it ends up not even being PvP at all.

If a side don't even have the 6 to start, team vs team would be the only solution.

[Ithnag]

your idea of waiting inside is good from the VP point, as people on the longest queu would win VP faster, yes it could be a solution, and at the same time allow rotation of people to keep even numbers (or as close as posible inside). However if the diference of numbers in the waiting room it's too big, even tho every of them would get VP's, they would still have to wait way long to PvP. Lot of the people that go to BS already got their VP's and waht they want is to PvP and have fun.

If FC would give some other options, like i have sugested, like team VS team action or variations of that ( you would have to get more options in the sign up)
you'd give option to the people that doesn't wanna wat, either standing out nor sitting in a social room only for VP's to participate of the BS to join a battle. Youll probably end up having a smaller "long" queue, composed of those that want to fight agaisnt the other faction specifically and/or want VP's.

I know that you'll never have a 1:1 perfect scenario, there are way too many things that can happen, but right now it starts with uneven invites and if any of the other situations occur, they can put it even worse. not 2 or 3 more, its been 10 more, 17 more, 23 more, and it really can work like that.

[gonegone]

I'm afraid whatever you do it going to be too late, Silirrion. The whole idea of BS is seriously compromised, and people are simply giving up already.

And believe me,a lot of them won't come back even if you fix something (which I don't believe anymore).

Moreover, unless it is SECRETLY PLANNED BY FUNCOM (not being serious of course), you are giving a serious advantage to one side at the moment. If there are any useful items introduced at the VP vendors, guess who is going to buy them first and have majority of people own them first. Yeah, the side that is winning all the BS right now because theyre 5 to 1 ratio.

[PodlaForum]

I vote omni's, at least on RK2, completely ignore BS until its fixed. Spam Omninet and ban ppl from omni bots if they go. Ofc Omni WC should make such a drastic decision and announce it. So no fix = no BS for anyone. It is really PITA to be zerged and spawn camped

[Ithnag]

i think that is way too extreme, on the other hand i chose not to go until a fix is introduced, and i will (again) test it intesively, in the case that sides are still uneven on a recurring basis 8not like one side has 1- 2 more people due to LD or the like, but the queue allowing more people from a side than the other, and not working to try and balance uneven numbers inside when thay occur) i'll post it again and won't return, again. If this is fixed it's posibly the single most fun and hooking thing that the game has to offer for a uge amount of players, being them PvPers or not, but as is, is just being the whole opposite.

[shaddow]

Well first of all we cant compare 1:1 ratio on other 3dshooter games with AO simply because you cant compare a keeper for example with a trader, there for the diferent side ratios. One drawback of 1:1 ratios is how well people organize inside, if here are much "title" wise people you wont see much of vechicle action around and therefor side with more apt/avt/mechs can win easy. If a side has no capture point "ninjaer" 1:1 would fail deplorably. I'm shure somone can come with many other reasons. I for example i wouldnt like 1:1 when there is like 6-8 fixers running around ripping eveyone off, or anyother good alpha proffesions.

What i've seen so far BS looks ok, just by observations. Well everyone can agree or not if they had same observations.

1. At BS waiting point - more blue dots the more blue in BS the more chance for blues to win, more red dots more red in BS more red chance to win. So far this looks ok to me since is right that the more people waiting would be only fair that they should win more. Each time on side has it's numbers icreased that side was almost winning. So far so good i'd say. But as i stated before each has it's own PVP style, ofcourse i dont like to die and lose, but i still think it's best as it is, until a better ideea

2. From my experience more active i was in mass PVP and vehicle actions i had better chance to get inside at next round, other then sitting in an apt and iddling my way out. So when i played safe i missed almost half of rounds and when active (defending capture points mostly, and pvp around those) got in almost everytime even with big side number waiting. If it's true it's a good ideea.

3. People pvp style in my opinion makes difference in BS so that even lower number of people might actually win, i saw that a few times for both sides. When grouped and organized small numbers were better. Did anybody say Title Farming? Well it's true this can get your chances to win even in more number even lower.

I guess there are a few reasons for me not to make 1:1 inside BS, each of those factors would be an even more inbalance.

What would work probably in my opinion is not 1:1 number balance, but more like now it is a PVP balance, more active faster chance to get inside, somehow get proffestion numbers close to each other, having way to many of one proffestion on one side and none on other can get to an inbalance.
I'd say that an 1:1 + or - 1/4 of that rule for each proffesion would be fair and not for general numbers.

Also rounding proffesion numbers can get to complains that some high numbers proffessions might get in harder, but still is better then 1:1 on general numbers. Just round the caps as it is now but on proffesions and not on general players.

There's more to say but i'm shure each one probably had same experience at some point even with losing or winning side.

[WC_]

Well first of all we cant compare 1:1 ratio on other 3dshooter games with AO simply because you cant compare a keeper for example with a trader ... If a side has no capture point "ninjaer" 1:1 would fail deplorably. I'm shure somone can come with many other reasons. I for example i wouldnt like 1:1 when there is like 6-8 fixers running around ripping eveyone off, or anyother good alpha proffesions.

What i've seen so far BS looks ok, just by observations. ...

1. At BS waiting point - more blue dots the more blue in BS the more chance for blues to win, more red dots more red in BS more red chance to win. So far this looks ok to me since is right that the more people waiting would be only fair that they should win more. ...

2. From my experience more active i was in mass PVP and vehicle actions i had better chance to get inside at next round. ...

3. People pvp style in my opinion makes difference in BS so that even lower number of people might actually win...

I guess there are a few reasons for me not to make 1:1 inside BS, each of those factors would be an even more inbalance.

What would work probably in my opinion is not 1:1 number balance, but more like now it is a PVP balance, more active faster chance to get inside, somehow get proffestion numbers close to each other, having way to many of one proffestion on one side and none on other can get to an inbalance.
I'd say that an 1:1 + or - 1/4 of that rule for each proffesion would be fair and not for general numbers.

Also rounding proffesion numbers can get to complains that some high numbers proffessions might get in harder, but still is better then 1:1 on general numbers. ...

Well, while I appreciate that you've taken the time to post your thoughts, your post is hard to understand, both on reasoning and grammatical fronts. I can see English isn't your first language, and it's not an easy one learn. I believe I can understand enough to point out some reasoning faults, as well as a perception fault.

2) This point of yours is wrong on perception. The BS queue works as a straight forward FIFO (First-In First-Out queue). If you were #26 in teh queue, then you will get the 26th invite sent to the side you signed up for. Anything you have done on the BS previously, or your profession is not used in any way. It's strictly the sign-up order that determines how fast you get invited to the next BS.

The rest of your points and thoughts are all along the same line: Since a given 1:1 invite scheme might result in an unbalanced BS due to profession advantages, we shouldn't use it.

To this, I will respond simply that there is no possibility that Funcom will take into consideration professions that are invited, due to the fact that BS usage numbers will not justify the time spent even attempting to do this. This will not happen.

Given this fact, and the fact that numbers will continue to be the ONLY consideration used to extend BS invites, it makes absolutely no sense to use any other scheme than a straight 1:1 invite scheme. There will be profession advantages held by one side for a given battle, as well as more 220's vs 210's, and skill advantages, but these will change from battle to battle, and hence over time, will be equal.

Your argument allowing the high-q side to have greater numbers completely ruins the very concept of BS. Prior to LE, the only PvP that existed in AO, was based on having more numbers on your side as the primary tactic to win. I am an avid PvP'er, as I have stated in other threads, but have had zero interest in PvP'ing in AO prior to LE. I do not find recruiting other people to come play with me as fun. The Battlestation was the very first time in AO, 6 years after launch, that Funcom has finally introduced a controlled instanced playfield where truly FUN balanced battles may be played. This is the ONLY PvP that I am interested in. Anyone that really likes PvP games, will agree with this opinion, I believe.

[Ithnag]

Theres no way to control the number of profesions that go from each side, it would require a lot more coding, and would end up getting even worse waiting times in queue. then come oter considerations that FC trully would have no way to control: is a side geting more twinked chars than the other?. That is imposible to even out, each side would have advantages or disadvantages (if numbers are even) in the quality of players that sign up, profesions and equipment. However both sides have good players, very well equiped players, and access to all clases, so, the only real means to balance things out is having sides with even (or max a dif of 1-2 as in any other capture the flag competence scenario) numbers.

[Osball]

Just my views on the subject:

I could be compleatly wrong here, but from what I've seen from some of the posts the majority of people complaining about the side imbalances are from RK2. I'm not saying this means anything it's just and observation. I play on RK1 and haven't seen anything similer to some of the extreames reported here. So maybe its more happening on RK2 than on RK1?

Also looking at what other games have done in the respect of mass PVP battles, taking Warsong Gulch from WoW for example (Yeah I've played WoW, flame me) if the number of players on a side drops below 6 i think it is, a message comes up saying that the battle will end soon due to not enough people and the victory going to the other side. Which makes sense as a system.

Implementing this into BSs could work I think, a BS starts when there are 20 people on each side(I'm making numbers up here, I dont know what the real ones are) so invites go out to the first 20 people in each of the side queues. Then if someone drops from say the clan side, an invite goes out to number 21 in the clan queue to bring the numbers back up to 20v20. if say 6 people drop out making it 20v14 then maybe have a period of say a minute in which the side with 14 has in which to get back over say 15 people (no greater than a 5 person difference) and invites go out to the next 6 people in the queue (since there are only 14 on the BS) if they all decline and there are no more people in the queue (yes an extreame case but it could happen) then if its still 20v14 after the grace period of a minute then the battle ends and the victory goes to the side with 20 people.

If you want a storyline element to it. Say its Clan 20 vs Omni 14, Omni has decided that they don't have enough troops to feasably capture the station so they pull out the remaining troops to save losses.