Manual re-balancing
 

Recently, I have attempted while playing to re-balance some of the more horribly balanced maps, such as Bocage or Operation Bagration, by starting on the axis team, stealing the most overpowered item of the bunch (usually FW190), landing it, then letting allies take it or switching to allies and taking it myself.

Now this serves to alleviate two problems - first, the huge problem of axis having too many players on every underbalanced map, as no one wants to be on the business end of all that uber power, by switching to the other team. Second, the disparity in materiel is evened out a bit.

Despite the fact that this huge disparity in the value and strength of the german units vs. allied (even more so than historically speaking, given some of the placeholder units), the effectiveness of german air defenses vs. the ineffectiveness of allied ones, the one-shot-one-kill-every-time axis fausts, inevitably the axis side starts whining and crying and begins tking me.

Now, this poses an interesting ethical question. Normally on balanced maps, this is a tactic that I would never use, as it is a pure exploit. However, on the horrendously balanced FH maps, there is no fair fight from the beginning, and this hardly evens the odds given the overwhelming axis advantage.

The whining seems to me to simply be: "You're taking away some of the toys that we all went to axis to play with so we can wipe the floor with the allies with our big guns and 2 to 1 player advantage. We don't like that you are trying to even things so now we will call you skillless and tk you regardless of the fact that it takes no skill to win as the axis side on these maps."

In these circumstances, is this sort of tactic such a bad thing to do? It isn't as if I can actually even out the huge imbalance on my own. But it sure is fun trying.

-Scorp

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Things have been changed with the planes and many other things in .6

Also everytime I have played on Bocage at the WOLF.net server allied has always won:(. I have played that map like 12 times within the pass week and I think the germans only won like 2 times.

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Yes, but we don't have .6, I'm talking about the maps we DO have. Balanced maps are fun to play as is. As to Bocage, all I can say is that I wish I had played ONCE and had the allies win. I have literally never seen it.

-Scorp

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Yeah but what I was saying by "In .6 we have changed alot blah blah" is the fact that we changed a good amount in attempt in balancing the game. I mean we can't magically change it now for .5e...

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Right, and what I am saying is that through what would normally be considered an exploit, I attempt to rebalance them myself. This causes what can only be described as frothing madness in the axis team. So I was posing an ethical question. I in no way, shape, or form am suggesting that the FH team should rebalance the maps (I think that should have been done before new maps/items/etc added for .6, but that's water under the bridge and not relevant to this thread), so I'm curious if you read the whole message or not? :)

-Scorp

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Scorp most of the modified vanilla maps like Bocage just dont work too good with FH. It's way too small for FH's bigger guns.

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Nijo, et al...

1) The maps are not currently balanced.
2) I know that they will NOT and CAN NOT be balanced by FH team until .6 comes. I was not suggesting this.
3) I want to play FH before .6, since I like it better than vanilla BF.
4) I try to manually balance them by stealing axis units in an exploitive way. This pisses people off.
5) I was wondering what people thought of the ethics of playing in this manner were.

See? No request to the FH team for anything.

-Scorp

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Well, that way still has it's risks i think......are you never killed being an enemey "delivering" their equipment to the other side ? Or do you announce your defection plans ?

There are no rules in pub servers anyway, other then what the admin states in the intro screen or auto message.

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

LOL Beast, I don't think anyone flying a FW can be killed by the allies even if they wanted to... :)

As for allies winning, I've also seen it on Bocage, just because the team tends to be a lot more veteran, a lot less childish and a great deal angrier about the balance. Seriously, after a while FH allied teams as a whole play a lot stronger these days because they really really want the win and they want to prove the Germans can lose. The best example for me was Valirisk, when (as usual) the Germans had every flag and we were down 800 tickets to 200. We somehow stormed back, using strong tactics and a real will to win to counter their equipment supremacy and we somehow won I think 50 to 0. It's hard work, but if you take the attitude that the Germans are going to lose, and that every casualty you inflict is just proving how damn good you are in the face of this unbalance, you tend to do really well as a team.

Winning as allied, even on Bocage, is do-able. And more so as time goes on, I think, because more 'veteran' players are playing allied in greater numbers, and we're all so angry at the balance usually that focuses us a bit better. At least in my case. :)

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

I have also seen the allies win Bocage loads of times, the main advantage the allies have is that they have two brigdes on to the center island, axis only have one - it is quite easy to pin down the axis at their brigde.

That said there are quit a few other maps that are very unbalanced.

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

BFE managed the panzerfaust-issue quite easy:On all converted maps, you get the panzershreck - most guys run around with rifles now, being assault or engineer. On late war maps, thats the way to go.

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

I think this tactic is simply cheating and ruins the game, and before you acuse me of just wanting the 'uber power', I always play on the underpowered side as it's more off a challenge. On a lot of servers I find the better players play on the underpowered side, which in itself balances the map.
Also this 'tactic' leads to people tk'ing which also ruins the game and winds everybody up.
Not having a go at you mate, just my opinion

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Don't think it's an option to use.
As default I always play Allied unless Axis is undermanned (nearly never)
It makes victory even sweeter when you crush them.
And as for "winning" on pub servers , I don't mind loosing , it's all about having a good time.

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Maybe FH should pick up another coder for weapons?

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Huh? What does that have to do with anything here? He's talking about vehicle imbalances not weapon imbalances :rolleyes:

But we already know all of this, this is like the 1000th thread about it. ;)

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

go ahead if you want to do it, the problem is that it probably will split the fh community ...

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Anyone else notice (generally speaking) that axis players tend to be more skilled and less noobish in their behavior and tactics?

I've seen god knows how many Allied APC's try and run a gauntlet of MG nests, and allied AT units on Battle of the Bulge ptotect one bridge and leave the other wide open. Hell, I've even seen allies with priests try and take bases!

Sure there are aces and noobs on each side, but I think that we need more treats for the "thinking player" to be persuaded to go allied more often.

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

First off, this seems very immature. Its not up to you to decide how things are to be balanced, and I agree that your teammates should shoot you if you supply the other team, thats more realistic than anything else. I usually play as Allies, as they usually have a /few/ less players (not half the players, as many people seem to exaggerate).

Second, Major hartmann and the other FH coders are awesome coders, and they are easily some of the best at weapon coding I have seen... However, a new coder never hurt a mod, not really...

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

I mostly see it the other way round, most players are getting drawn into Axis by the Panzerfaust , Tiger , Stuka etc . . . . . . more expirienced players like a little more challenge and go Allied.

But like you said , noobs are on both sides.
They jump into your 105 mm Howitzer yelling "Go,Go, Go ! ! ! " when you're providing covering fire , they rush their tanks into battle without any infantry cover etc . . . . .

They start whining on-line "This map is sooooooooo unbalanced " , "Tiger is waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay to strong" , "I really hate this map" etc . . .

Why do they just don't leave instead of whining beats me.

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

[QUOTE=raslin]First off, this seems very immature. Its not up to you to decide how things are to be balanced, and I agree that your teammates should shoot you if you supply the other team, thats more realistic than anything else. I usually play as Allies, as they usually have a /few/ less players (not half the players, as many people seem to exaggerate).[QUOTE]

Who is it up to to decide how things should be balanced, if not the players? On the contrary, it is a mature and conscious decision. Up until this point I have always played as allies. How is it not mature to see a generally agreed upon flaw and attempt to fix that flaw through the only means that I, as a player, have available to me?

Exaggeration or not, the axis side (on the unbalanced maps) constantly has more players than the allied one.

Pierce - You do yourself a discredit. If you think this thread is simply a complaint about unit imbalances, then you haven't read it. Since when do you reply without reading the thread?

-Scorp

Edit: Added reply to Pierce

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

err actaulyl the game mostly selects axis for me most of the time. maybe it because its athe first team

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Maybe because you don't have that many servers to chose from :rolleyes:

IF i whine on something it's the maps, so here's a request to all server admins: Plz remove the fanmaps, maybe 2-3 maps are decent and the rest is just boring to play because they are so unbalanced (no offense to the creators)

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

There's hundreds of Vanilla servers to chose from.

Now could you pls name the ones which are so unbalanced ?

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Vanilla sucks compared to FH.


Kaukasus: Allied tanks superior. Too few tanks.(and wtf is the La7 good for...)

Norway: Unbalanced, allies always win

Korsun: Can be rather fun sometimes, but it's still very unbalanced

Bagration: No comments necisery, it's the suckiest FH map.

And that's just a few, but don't get me wrong, i love FH and it's the best BF mod but the maps are FHs weak point, but im convinsed(sp?) it will change in 0.6 :D

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Heh, I played that map like 13 times this week and the Germans ALWAYS win. Me262 + FW190 = pwnage. Also on ElAlamein; they take the FW190 and constantly destroy planes so the allies get destroyed. I didnt even use jeeps cause the FW190 would ALWAYS get me.

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

And they kill your crusader too :madman:

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

Ok, I'll address some issues in turn here.

1.) Re: the "manual balance" technique, if I see someone doing that on the WOLF servers where I admin, they're going to get kicked and/or banned. Maybe not permanently banned, but at least a three day ban. I don't like how a lot of the maps play out either, and I'm EAGERLY awaiting 0.6, but griefing your own team is not the solution. Try developing tactics to counter the advantage and join the other team. That said, if anyone TKs you for doing so, they'll get a nice kick/ban as well. At least, that's how I'd handle the situation.

2.) Re: who are the better players, I find that it's pretty much split evenly. You get good players on both teams, and neither team is ALWAYS more "n00bish" than the other. I agree that the Germans tend to draw the less experienced players primarily because of their gross equipment advantage, but as you start to get more experienced with the Allied equipment, not ALL of it is crap. I used to HATE the PIAT, but if you can get used to the arc of the weapon, it can be fairly powerful sometimes (it's still kind of inconsistent for me, though). That said, it's clear, and I'm sure the devs know, that the Germans tend to have a pretty ridiculous equipment advantage.

3.) Re: which maps are good, I think it depends partially on the level of the players playing them, and partially on the maps themselves. I too have yet to see the allies win Bocage. Hell, I've yet to see them hold a single flag throughout an entire match, including the one on their side of the bridge. I haven't seen the Germans win Market Garden in ages, though I played an excellent game last night on that map (by comparison anyway -- only a 200 point spread). So far, I haven't seen the germans win Stalingrad, but that map always sucked anyway.

Most of the maps showcase the imbalance of the mod, though, and a lot of the fan maps, while ambitious and interesting at first, are crap. Zielna Gora is pointless and to me feels as bad as the original Berlin map. That's a fan map, though, so I don't count that against the FH team. Valirisk is a fairly unbalanced map both in terms of equipment and in terms of (more importantly) placement. The Germans start considerably closer to the capturable flags than the Russians on that one.

What I've noticed mostly is that it isn't always that the maps themselves are unbalanced, but rather that the maps can become dominated by either side and once in a dominating position, it is damn near impossible to shift the balance again. I think this is because 1.) defense is MUCH easier than offense in this mod (as it should be, and as MANY people don't quite get yet), and 2.) many of the converted DICE maps (and even some of the FH ones) are a little small for the range of the weapons and vehicles in this mod. Also, I don't think people quite get how to actually attack effectively yet. They're too used to charging in blindly, on their own, guns blazing, and hoping that one or two other guys are backing them up, or not. Whatever. Also, whereas in Vanilla the tank is king, here it's clearly infantry. Many people don't understand that concept yet, and many people are only too happy to speed off towards a flag without either infantry cover or even an MGer.

We had a WOLF member play FH for the first time last night and, aside from noticing how much more level the tank gun trajectory is, he noticed (after I pointed it out) how MGs are now less about killing and more about suppression. He found the tank mounted ones to be more accurate, to fire MUCH faster, and to be much more LETHAL when you hit with them, which helped him understand why I'd told him "Just spray the gun in a general area. Don't worry about aiming. Your job in the tank is to make the enemy stay down, not to kill them necessarily."

This tactic was used to good effect last night on OMG. A German StugIII came rolling over the stone bridge, accompanied by a top-mounted MGer. The Stug couldn't capture the base and couldn't kill us all (I'd hidden in the concrete bunker, others were hiding behind the hill and the sandbags). The MGer was able to keep me pinned down in the bunker where I would've fired my PIAT from and killed the Stug if I could've popped my head up. If these guys had been patient and had been supported by infantry, the flag could've been theirs. Instead, the MGer who'd played quite well up til this point, dismounted to clear us out (he was a close quarters guy), at which point I popped up and put one between his eyes with my Webley (MAN that thing's powerful). Someone else then hit the tank with a PIAT and it was game over, man.

BUT, if they'd been able to keep our heads down long enough for infantry to assault the base in a group, we'd have been toast. THAT's how you have to take a position using a tank.

Anyway, I've rambled on enough here. Suffice to say that as 0.6 comes out, as people play smarter, and as we get newer, more balanced maps, there shouldn't be a need to "manually balance" the game. And if I catch folks doing that on the WOLF servers, I'll kick and maybe ban them (but will do the same to those who TK in response to this tactic). Play the matches out, or ask us to change the maps. Sometimes we'll change 'em ourselves without prompting because we KNOW the map is unbalanced or because there's no point in playing any longer (IE: one team controls all the flags and has pinned the other team into their main base and the other team just ain't gettin' out).

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

No.2 is da king, 1 shot in the chest and ur dead ;) Just love that pistol

Re: Manual re-balancing
 

It's a badass. No question.