Balancing ET Maps, Attacker v. Defender

[Bean]

I'm a military history nut. Old school wargamer too. These two things have taught me this: An attacker needs 3:1 odds in order to have a decent chance at success.

 

In most matches of ET, however, the opposing forces are roughly numerically equal. Moreover, with effective shuffling and team management by admins, the two forces will be similar in fighting power and battle smarts.

 

So, in theory, the defender should almost always win. But they don't always win. In my experience, the attackers win just as often as the defenders.

 

Now, I get that ET is not an accurate simulation of WW2 warfare, but the principles of attack and defense should still apply. What gives?

 

I'm not sure, but I think map makers must realize this, so they structure the map to give advantages to the attacker. Closer spawns maybe? Faster spawn times? Other landscape features that favour the attacker?

 

If so, I have renewed respect for map makers. What a balancing act that must be tested extensively before release!

[L3ftY.]

spawn times and locations can make a big advantage to either side, depending on the map. also, number of medics vs number of engies, soldiers, etc. on your team plays a big part.

 

most importantly, player experience. scrim experience in particular - knowing maps well, where to camp, where to defend can be the deciding factor. one experienced player can easily dominate the opposing team. 

 

and however impossible it may be sometimes, especially with certain trolls on the server, keeping teams fair for everyone on the servers is our ultimate goal.

 

even if some trolls disagree.

[CheepHeep]

In my opinion, spawn times and spawn placement play a small role in winning a map. The times and places are different for each team to even out the chances. In scrims, axis have 30 second spawn where as allies have 20 seconds which i deem quite reasonable. Again, for me, It comes down to team work and strategy. Of course when playing online against random players, it becomes nearly impossible to coordinate between players because either the other players doesn't cooperate or they just want to go on a killing rampage ( I'm guilty of this ). Skill is also a major factor, as comatose said, a well developed player will easily annihilate and dominate up to 5 players at least single-handedly provided the 5 are new or just noob ( like coma ). On the other hand, say these 5 players aren't experienced in shooting or have undeveloped aiming technique but have polished communication and clever tactics, they'll easily overthrow the more skilled "Killer".

 

A balance between killing and strategy is what most should aim for. Experience has taught me that most players have an imbalance of this which is why at times it becomes very uneven. I, for instance, on Hardcore have 2.5 KDR but posses an embarrassingly low PRW because I focus on killing as I don't have to try so hard ( easy to relax and play ). I wish to switch this up and focus on objective now though.

 

Also, the shuffling is based on KDR which doesn't always result in accurate balancing. I believe the PRW of a player is what the shuffle should be based on as it is a heavy indication of how many times that player wins a match. You may say it will end up with a heavy KDR sided match but then again most of the time KDR and PRW are proportional to each other. It also doesn't help that certain people ignore the shuffle and switch teams afterwards. 

[-=HipKat=-]

To the OP, reminds me of possibly why in ETPro spawn times are 15 seconds for Allies and 30 for Axis

[Bean]

 

and however impossible it may be sometimes, especially with certain trolls on the server, keeping teams fair for everyone on the servers is our ultimate goal.

 

even if some trolls disagree.

 

I can't imagine how difficult it is to manage the shuffle-dodgers. Some people are addicted to one team, I guess, and don't give a damn about attempts to balance things out. They can't see beyond their own noses!

[-=HipKat=-]

I can't imagine how difficult it is to manage the shuffle-dodgers. Some people are addicted to one team, I guess, and don't give a damn about attempts to balance things out. They can't see beyond their own noses!

I moved Elk to Axis one time to balance teams and give Axis a much needed good player and he went spec and spent the entire map crying about it. Tonight I asked Ting to go to Axis and got a flat out No

[L3ftY.]

I moved Elk to Axis one time to balance teams and give Axis a much needed good player and he went spec and spent the entire map crying about it. Tonight I asked Ting to go to Axis and got a flat out No

Sometimes we ask players nicely enough, and explain why they need to move, maybe because they were the last player to join the server. Then you get threatened that they will report you and take screenshots because they consider it admin abuse.

 

These are the players you have to give special attention to because they can turn the server upside down in an instant. We call this type of problem child a 'troll' because they think they can do as they please.

 

Good times, good times.

Edited December 30, 2016 by L3ftY.

[+ homelessssssssssssssssssss]

Does FA track what % of attacking teams win each map?

[Eazy]

Maps are made this way soo both teams have equal chances to win. We are not reconstructing ww2 , it is just a back ground. What do you think would happend if allies always have advantage ? No one would want to play axis .... allies would be stack more then ever and axis full of noobs getting pwnd hard . I understand that historically , allies have won the war but in a multi players fps game we must give both side the same chances to win . This way , the team focusing on obj will win the map.

[Flible]

In my opinion, spawn times and spawn placement play a small role in winning a map. The times and places are different for each team to even out the chances. In scrims, axis have 30 second spawn where as allies have 20 seconds which i deem quite reasonable. Again, for me, It comes down to team work and strategy. Of course when playing online against random players, it becomes nearly impossible to coordinate between players because either the other players doesn't cooperate or they just want to go on a killing rampage ( I'm guilty of this ). Skill is also a major factor, as comatose said, a well developed player will easily annihilate and dominate up to 5 players at least single-handedly provided the 5 are new or just noob ( like coma ). On the other hand, say these 5 players aren't experienced in shooting or have undeveloped aiming technique but have polished communication and clever tactics, they'll easily overthrow the more skilled "Killer".

 

A balance between killing and strategy is what most should aim for. Experience has taught me that most players have an imbalance of this which is why at times it becomes very uneven. I, for instance, on Hardcore have 2.5 KDR but posses an embarrassingly low PRW because I focus on killing as I don't have to try so hard ( easy to relax and play ). I wish to switch this up and focus on objective now though.

 

Also, the shuffling is based on KDR which doesn't always result in accurate balancing. I believe the PRW of a player is what the shuffle should be based on as it is a heavy indication of how many times that player wins a match. You may say it will end up with a heavy KDR sided match but then again most of the time KDR and PRW are proportional to each other. It also doesn't help that certain people ignore the shuffle and switch teams afterwards. 

I disagree with your statement that a developed player can annihilate and dominate up to 5 players even when they are noob. In the end, he'll still add less value to the team.

But maybe that's because I've tasted both ends of this line now that I only have a crappy laptop

[Badboyz]

I think IMO is that the team that has medics that do medic they have the more of a chance to get the objective.  I mean the running of time to and from a point takes up most of the time and if you can keep advancing plus if you get full health it is almost like a new body per say.  So medic that medic is the key in many of the maps.  They keep the teams moving or keep the defenders defending. 

 

[Bean]

This thread is more about the work of the map makers - the labour that they put into ensuring that the map offers an equal chance for both teams to win. I guess map makers must live-evaluate maps on private servers with some test monkeys. Then they tweek where needed.

[Alphaloki]

Interesting topic ! Many factors are involved in the equation : frag skills, knowledge of the map, number of players, map design etc. But the main difference is that people play differently on a pub and a private server. On a pub server, the players go to the objective but are not coordinated. Some groups of players may be coordinated on a part of the map while the rest of the players play solo. On a private server, the players can coordinate their actions and communicate via TS so they will be more efficient.

 

Also on some maps, if all the players of a team camp near the objective, it's very difficult for a team to get the objective because of all the firing power concentrated in one place. For example, on Goldrush, if all axis players stay in the bank, with three MG42s at the back, flamers on both sides of the door + medics and field ops all around, even a skilled team will find it very difficult to get the gold. Also a team tends to adapt to the other team's skills. If a team is much stronger than the other one it will spawn kill the other, if it is just stronger, it will cover more territory, and the more weaker it is the more it will stay close to the objective.