Welcome to Tactical Gamer

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 51
Discussion: Team Fortress 2 / Team Fortress 2 - General Discussion - Auto-balance - Originally Posted by Pokerface You'd rather continue an utter domination of a team half your
  1. #16

    Hidus's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    629

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Pokerface View Post
    You'd rather continue an utter domination of a team half your size?
    That team only got to be half sized because half of them quit when they were losing. It wasn't a random occurrence. So the winning team gets punished for their success. Yeah that makes sense.
    2 Legit 2 Quit

  2.  
  3. #17

    Pokerface's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    MD, USA
    Age
    33
    Posts
    5,914

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Zoopy_T View Post
    It's better then falsely punishing people's teamwork by throwing them to the other side near the end of a round.
    The losing team will certainly appreciate your lack of respect and your placing your desire to win above the enjoyment of everyone else on the server.

    Punishment for good teamwork? Takes a great team to keep that pressure on with a 20% manpower advantage. I'm amazed people manage it.

    NS Game Officer. TF2 Admin. BF2 Admin / Scripter. PM with issues.
    Tempus: Pokerface is nailing it right on the head. Everyone who is arguing against him is simply arguing against reality.
    <anmuzi> it is not permitted to have privacy or anonymity
    <LazyEye> yeah when I play on TG the server digs though my trash

    Arm yourself with knowledge: TG NS TF2 BF2

  4.  
  5. #18

    Nikolas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    4,074

    Re: Auto-balance

    I don't think that we're at risk of having teams with massively different player numbers. I think the biggest we'll deal with is a 10 on 12, and hopefully it will only last for the thirty seconds to one minute that it takes a new player to load in and join the fray. If we do end up with a 9 on 12 or heaven forbid 6 on 12, I'd be simply shocked if TG people didn't switch to the weaker side on their own.

    We can always try it out for one night - or even part of a night - and forget about this whole discussion if we're not happy with the results.
    A policy of freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy. -F.A. Hayek

    "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

  6.  

     
  7. #19

    Hidus's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    629

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Pokerface View Post
    The losing team will certainly appreciate your lack of respect and your placing your desire to win above the enjoyment of everyone else on the server.

    Punishment for good teamwork? Takes a great team to keep that pressure on with a 20% manpower advantage. I'm amazed people manage it.
    Once again, that 20% manpower advantage only occurred because a couple people quit when they saw they were losing. Metagaming at its finest.
    2 Legit 2 Quit

  8.  
  9. #20

    TheFeniX's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Age
    29
    Posts
    4,799

    Re: Auto-balance

    The problem with the idea of "I want to stay on the winning side" because it's more fun to win is you're completely ignoring the desire for fun on the opposing team.

    Nothing (and I mean nothing) sucks worse that being on a public server where 2-3 people leave because they think their side is going to lose and then being stuck on that team where defeat is now assured because of a team imbalance. I made this post YEARS AGO and I still believe in it 100%.

    I don't think I'd see a single person here complaining about autoswitch if you were the one constantly ending up on the losing team (without being team-switched).

    People seem to view it as a privilege they have as being an SM to put your enjoyment over a random pub, because "they're just pubs." Remember, there was a time in your gaming life that you were nothing but a pubber at TG. How would you feel if you joined a TG server and found that SMs not only had reserved slot access (which is a given), but also had the right to chose to put the nail in the coffin if your team is losing.

    Even teams means even teams at all times.

    If you're playing TF2 as a diversion for a while, then that's fine. But my job as GO is to make this server succeed on it's own. When everyone here goes back to BF2, BF2142, PCS, and NS: I'm left with all the pieces from that. I am going to work to foster an environment that is acceptable to all players. And you don't bring in SMs by alienating public players.

    You will have the chance to game with your friends, but it not a guaranteed deal. I can't make that kind of favoritism a part of TG:TF2 and still expect public players to want to join and consider becoming Supporting Members.

    Now, if we get some kind of admin tool that autobalances non-SMs first, then I might look into it. But so far, I have seen no worthwhile argument. And "I want to be on the winning team" is not a good enough reason.

    You know you helped your team win that round. Is it that important for you to see it on the screen? Will it somehow elevate you to some greatness? Will people revel in how cool you are? No. It's just a game.

    I'm having enough problems just making room for SMs over pubs. I can't even think about trying to make judgement calls on team balance this early in the server's career.

    You guys can debate this all you want and that's fine because talk is good, but auto-balance is going to stay on unless some major issue is found with it.

  10.  
  11. #21

    Hidus's Avatar

    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    629

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFeniX View Post
    The problem with the idea of "I want to stay on the winning side" because it's more fun to win is you're completely ignoring the desire for fun on the opposing team.

    Nothing (and I mean nothing) sucks worse that being on a public server where 2-3 people leave because they think their side is going to lose and then being stuck on that team where defeat is now assured because of a team imbalance. I made this post YEARS AGO and I still believe in it 100%.

    I don't think I'd see a single person here complaining about autoswitch if you were the one constantly ending up on the losing team (without being team-switched).

    People seem to view it as a privilege they have as being an SM to put your enjoyment over a random pub, because "they're just pubs." Remember, there was a time in your gaming life that you were nothing but a pubber at TG. How would you feel if you joined a TG server and found that SMs not only had reserved slot access (which is a given), but also had the right to chose to put the nail in the coffin if your team is losing.

    Even teams means even teams at all times.

    If you're playing TF2 as a diversion for a while, then that's fine. But my job as GO is to make this server succeed on it's own. When everyone here goes back to BF2, BF2142, PCS, and NS: I'm left with all the pieces from that. I am going to work to foster an environment that is acceptable to all players. And you don't bring in SMs by alienating public players.

    You will have the chance to game with your friends, but it not a guaranteed deal. I can't make that kind of favoritism a part of TG:TF2 and still expect public players to want to join and consider becoming Supporting Members.

    Now, if we get some kind of admin tool that autobalances non-SMs first, then I might look into it. But so far, I have seen no worthwhile argument. And "I want to be on the winning team" is not a good enough reason.

    You know you helped your team win that round. Is it that important for you to see it on the screen? Will it somehow elevate you to some greatness? Will people revel in how cool you are? No. It's just a game.

    I'm having enough problems just making room for SMs over pubs. I can't even think about trying to make judgement calls on team balance this early in the server's career.

    You guys can debate this all you want and that's fine because talk is good, but auto-balance is going to stay on unless some major issue is found with it.
    The main flaw in this wonderful essay is you assume that the people who want to play with their friends are only doing it to win. I would rather lose 10 rounds in a row if it meant I got to be on the same team with my IHS than win 10 rounds in a row with random people I don't know.
    2 Legit 2 Quit

  12.  

     
  13. #22

    Beatnik's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Age
    36
    Posts
    4,432

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Pokerface View Post
    The losing team will certainly appreciate your lack of respect and your placing your desire to win above the enjoyment of everyone else on the server.
    That's a little melodramatic. Nobody's arguing for unbalanced teams or stacked teams, or not respecting opponents, or even advocating a "win at all costs" perspective.

    We're all adults and mature players, and will balance out teams if needed. But the fact of the matter is that this has simply not been an issue we've seen on the server.

    On a side note, I propose we hold off on the bickering and philosophizing until we actually encounter, you know, real issues, as opposed to hypotheticals.

    That being said, the auto-balance is less than ideal but the best solution right now, IMO.
    Beatnik

  14.  
  15. #23

    Zoopy's Avatar

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Posts
    1,869

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFeniX View Post
    You guys can debate this all you want and that's fine because talk is good, but auto-balance is going to stay on unless some major issue is found with it.
    Autobalance causes cancer.

  16.  
  17. #24

    D0ubl3Hel1x's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    35
    Posts
    532

    Re: Auto-balance

    Personally, I don't see a problem with auto-balance. I have been switched to the opposing side from my IHS a few times and it's just as fun as shooting Aruncado or Ainselie in the face as it is to follow them around as a healer.

    Since the server usually has a waiting list of people to join maybe setting up a delay for the auot-balance just to give time for someone to join. I can't see team being down one person for 60-90 seconds as being catastrophic.

  18.  

     
  19. #25

    Pokerface's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    MD, USA
    Age
    33
    Posts
    5,914

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFeniX View Post
    The problem with the idea of "I want to stay on the winning side" because it's more fun to win is you're completely ignoring the desire for fun on the opposing team.

    Nothing (and I mean nothing) sucks worse that being on a public server where 2-3 people leave because they think their side is going to lose and then being stuck on that team where defeat is now assured because of a team imbalance. I made this post YEARS AGO and I still believe in it 100%.
    I'd like to point out Wyz's post in that thread as well. An excellent take on balance.

    NS Game Officer. TF2 Admin. BF2 Admin / Scripter. PM with issues.
    Tempus: Pokerface is nailing it right on the head. Everyone who is arguing against him is simply arguing against reality.
    <anmuzi> it is not permitted to have privacy or anonymity
    <LazyEye> yeah when I play on TG the server digs though my trash

    Arm yourself with knowledge: TG NS TF2 BF2

  20.  
  21. #26

    D0ubl3Hel1x's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Age
    35
    Posts
    532

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Beatnik View Post
    That's a little melodramatic. Nobody's arguing for unbalanced teams or stacked teams, or not respecting opponents, or even advocating a "win at all costs" perspective.

    We're all adults and mature players, and will balance out teams if needed. But the fact of the matter is that this has simply not been an issue we've seen on the server.

    On a side note, I propose we hold off on the bickering and philosophizing until we actually encounter, you know, real issues, as opposed to hypotheticals.

    That being said, the auto-balance is less than ideal but the best solution right now, IMO.
    Off topic: South Austin represent!!

  22.  
  23. #27

    TheFeniX's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Houston, TX
    Age
    29
    Posts
    4,799

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Hidus View Post
    The main flaw in this wonderful essay is you assume that the people who want to play with their friends are only doing it to win.
    It's perception: the people on the wrong side of an unbalanced team don't care why you chose to keep the teams imbalanced, only that they are imbalanced.

    You're looking at this from only your own perspective, and that's fine for a player: I don't have that luxury as GO. I have to make sure everyone has a fun environment to game while keeping in line with TG SOP. Keep that in mind when you're arguing with me.

    If I ran a TG server based on only my perspective of how the game should be played: Apo and I would butt heads a lot more than we already do. So, I have to find a happy medium where we stand the best chance of success.

    I would rather lose 10 rounds in a row if it meant I got to be on the same team with my IHS than win 10 rounds in a row with random people I don't know.
    And here is the crux of your argument: you assume that by being pushed to the other team, all you will have to game with is random players.

    TF2 doesn't need tightly knit squads that work well together. What games like TF2 needs are players who can work with what they have, take charge when they need to, and change their plan when the situation arises.

    I can't stop "clicks" from forming around the different games that TF2 has drawn in from TG, but I'm not about to foster the behavior. Yes it's cliche, but "random people" are just people you haven't had a chance to get to know yet. And at least online, you don't have to worry about strangers leaving you bleeding in an alleyway.

    What could you possibly stand to lose by broadening your player horizons on a server that is bringing in players from all aspects of TG? I look at it like this: it's a new game. Even the people I know from other games at TG will have different mindsets when playing TF2. I take it as a sense of pride that I'm already building a repor with players like TG Nemesis, whom I've never gamed with.

    You have to want this community succeed. And you do that by formed bonds with ALL players at TG:TF2. I just do not see a benefit in forming clicks here. It's not like BF2 where you can get lost in the utter magnitude of the games. 12 vs 12 leaves enough room for you to interact with nearly all the players on your team. And something tells me in the future, we won't even be running 12 vs 12 for long. It will most likely get smaller anyways.

    Like I said before: if you're looking to use TF2 as a diversion up until you go back to BF2, PCS, NS, etc (I've seen a lot of this from being the GO of Dystopia), then you have the right attitude for just that. But that attitude doesn't help me make TF2 a mainstay at TG, so I'm not going to condone it.

  24.  

     
  25. #28

    Pokerface's Avatar

    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    MD, USA
    Age
    33
    Posts
    5,914

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by Bommando View Post
    I'd like to point out the Natural Selection love-fest going on. Looks like a major armory-humping
    It's not meant to be an NS love-fest; it's just that we've had this discussion many many many times before.

    NS Game Officer. TF2 Admin. BF2 Admin / Scripter. PM with issues.
    Tempus: Pokerface is nailing it right on the head. Everyone who is arguing against him is simply arguing against reality.
    <anmuzi> it is not permitted to have privacy or anonymity
    <LazyEye> yeah when I play on TG the server digs though my trash

    Arm yourself with knowledge: TG NS TF2 BF2

  26.  
  27. #29

    Beatnik's Avatar

    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Age
    36
    Posts
    4,432

    Re: Auto-balance

    Quote Originally Posted by TheFeniX View Post
    And something tells me in the future, we won't even be running 12 vs 12 for long. It will most likely get smaller anyways.
    Beatnik

  28.  
  29. #30

    Nikolas's Avatar

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    4,074

    Re: Auto-balance

    I spent several rounds on the losing team yesterday because my 7th bros were on that side.

    I don't understand why wanting to play with friends is being conflated with team stacking. Let's leave the team stacking out of this.

    No one's saying that they want to play with their friends "ALL OF THE TIME." The point is that it's nice to be able to do so when one wants to.

    I still don't see the harm in trying autobalance off, and seeing what happens.
    A policy of freedom for the individual is the only truly progressive policy. -F.A. Hayek

    "$250,000 a year won't get me to Central Park West."

  30.  

     

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts


  
 

Back to top