Balancing Fights - 2017

Introduction

So the community has voted – Imbalanced fights (zerging) are the biggest problem PS2 has right now. So what do we do about it? Well we could make each territory have a queue to enter… but that wouldn’t work as it’s no longer massively multiplayer. We could deny the acquisition of tanks, aircraft and MAXs to overpopulated forces in a region… but most vehicles are pulled outside it anyway. We could give outnumbered folk more health or higher damage weapons... but that makes me feel a bit sick. So we need some other options to massage player behaviour so that fights are more balanced by choice, and when players choose to make fights unbalanced do the rebalancing for them.

I did some work on this previously here, and while I still like all of the ideas on that image that massage player behaviour (i.e. directives and HUD additions) I feel that more can be made of slowing the spawn timers for overpopulated factions as that alone is inelegant. Plus I wanted to break out some math and figure it all out. If that's not your cup of tea the TLDR is down at the bottom.

Balancing fights is tricky as it is not only the population balance however that determines how fair a fight is. Ignoring skill, teamwork and tactics the remaining factors are:

  • Population Balance

  • Force Multipliers

  • Base difficulty

  • Attack direction

Each of these impacts on how easy a territory is to capture. What I suggest is that these factors contribute to an overall 'attack difficulty factor' which then impacts on the following ‘dials’:

  • Spawn timer – default 10s – maximum 30s, no minimum

  • Resource flow – default 50 nanites per minute (n/m) – maximum 100n/m, minimum of 25n/m

  • Experience multipliers – default 0% - no maximum or minimum

  • Reinforcements needed population cut off currently sits at 50/50 population but could be changed

Potentially these dials could be just for positive effects for the underdog but we could also apply negatives to those who have the advantage if we so desire.

Details

Effective force

As it stands population is the factor that determines reinforcements needed options however if one side has dozens of MAXs, tanks and aircraft (force multipliers) while the other does not the fight will be woefully imbalanced. The population balance and force multipliers would combine to make a value called ‘effective force’ (EF) something which Mustarde proposed almost a year ago. By balancing the fight around the effective force instead of just population we would reduce the impact of both population and force multiplier imbalance.

To that end each nanite costing vehicle or MAX would be assigned a value which would count up (if a player is using them) as follows:

  • Infantry: 1

  • MAX: 3

  • Flash: 2

  • Harasser: 3

  • Lightning: 3

  • ANT: 2

  • Sunderer: 3

  • MBT: 3

  • ESF: 3

  • Valkyrie: 2

  • Liberator: 3

  • Galaxy: 4

All numbers subject to discussion.

The attack difficulty factor would be the defender effective force divided by the attacker effective force. This would mean that if all was even then the multiplier would be 1 but if the defenders had the advantage the attack difficulty factor would be greater than 1 whereas if the attackers had the advantage then it would be less than 1.

Base difficulty

Base difficulty could be decided on a per territory factor which potentially could be based around real capture statistics. As a few examples:

  • Biolab: factor of 1.1

  • Tech Plant: factor of 1.05

  • Amp Station: 1.05

  • 3 point base: factor of 1.15

  • Outpost: factor of 1

All these numbers are subject to discussion, as are any others in this document.

Attack Direction

Attack direction is also an important factor - take as an example Biolabs. Biolabs are notoriously tough to take and different adjacent territories have different teleporter and jump pad options with some clearly better than others. We would have to account for situations where an attacker has multiple attack lanes as well so I would simply remove this factor entirely if they have more than one lane.

Example

An attack on Allatum Biolab from the north, the defenders have greater population and more force multipliers. Usually this would be a near impossible capture without some seriously inept defenders or some sound tactics by the attackers. Using this system the attackers would have more of a chance. Details below.

Effective force:

Attacker

30 Infantry 30x1=30

2 MAXs 2x3=6

3 ESFs 3x3=9

2 Sunderers 2x3=6

Total effective force: 51

Defender

35 Infantry 35x1=35

6 MAXs 6x3=18

2 MBT 2x3=6

1 Harasser 1x3=3

Total effective force: 62

This would mean that the effective force balance would be 51 vs 62. If we convert this into an attack difficulty factor (defender effective force divided by the attacker effective force) it gives us 1.22

The VS are attacking Allatum Biolab from the north, with the following factors:

  • Effective force: factor of 1.22

  • Base difficulty: factor of 1.1

  • Attack direction: factor of 1.05

Overall attack difficulty factor (all factors multiplied together): 1.41

Impact

Once this difficulty factor is worked out we can see how this impacts the ‘dials’ as I called them above.

Reinforcements needed cut off: 11 more attacker EF would be able to reinforce the attack to equalise the 62 defender EF, with spawns directly into new vehicles contributing to the effective force immediately.

What this should mean is that in the example situation the no doubt struggling attackers would be able to spawn faster than their enemies, would be able to pull more MAXs to help hold ground inside the Biolab and be rewarded for their efforts through extra experience. On top of this they would also have a chance that more friendlies could come to help. Having the difference in respawns time would mean that the attackers have better logistics getting people back to the fight than the defenders which would help immensely.

Problems

This system is not without issues as I will detail here.

First I know that some dislike anything that could negatively affect a player – and having a player’s spawn time increased along with reducing their experience and nanite income would certainly do that. We could however only affect the dials in a positive manner, so that nobody gets longer spawns, less income or XP. Personally though I feel that this would be a shame, as having a bit of extra time on the respawn screen may make some players rethink where they are fighting and the behaviorist in me things that if you are going to use carrots you have to have a stick in the other hand.

Also applying a difficulty factor to not only every base but every attack direction could be time consuming, however comparing that to redesigning every base so that it caters not only for small and large fights but imbalanced ones (a near impossible task) and it pales in comparison.

A problem we already have is that of population in a territory that is not part of the base capture or defence, such as those travelling through or sitting defending a HIVE. What could be done is to add a distance part of effective force equation if we think this is needed.

There is also a small issue of ghost capping - if there are zero enemies in a territory then the equations fall apart, so perhaps always have one effective force in all territories. Could say it is the risk of breaking an ankle, or trying to survive an enemy spawn rooms pain field for too long.

Other methods could also be effective in stopping zerging, personally I'd like to see the mission system massively improved along with command changes to support leaders putting an appropriate amount of force where it is needed, but just see my other work for how that could help.

Ultimately though these issues are minor compared to the current situation we have where players often complain about spending longer finding a fight than being in one because of zergs and the negative effect it has on the game.

Conclusion

This system would make it so that more fights are balanced, rewarding and enjoyable. It would encourage people to think about the map and dare-I-say-it strategy, think about where they will be useful and make a difference. We should also see more incentive to attack as even if the enemy respond in force they will be handicapped in some way compared to you which should balance the fight so you have more of a chance of success.

TLDR: Give the outmatched more XP, nanites, population and faster respawns than the defenders. Also I used the word massage twice.

- January 2017